In yet another order, the highest consumer court in India has come down heavily on the railways for failing to protect the belongings of passengers on board the train. In a series of orders delivered in the last 18 months or so, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has held the railways liable for not just the theft of passengers’ baggage, but also personal belongings such as jewellery worn by the passengers. In the case of General Manager, Northern Railway vs Amarnath Aggarwal, for example, where the passenger’s gold chain was snatched, the apex consumer court upheld the decision of the lower consumer court to award Rs 32,000 to the passenger towards the loss of the chain.

In this case, the window in the compartment in which the complainant travelled with his family had no glass pane and this had facilitated the thief snatching the gold chain worn by the complainant’s wife. The passengers’ attempt to stop the train immediately had also failed because the alarm chain meant for such emergencies was not working.

Earlier, in a similar case (M. Kanthimathi vs Government of India, Ministry of Railways) the National Commission had made it clear that the railways would be held liable if the passengers’ baggage or belongings were lost as a result of negligence of the railway staff or any misconduct on their part. In the case of Union of India vs Sanjiv Dilsukhlal Dave too the consumer court had passed a similar verdict.

Now in the case of South Eastern Railways vs Bharti Arora, it has elaborated on the responsibility of the railways in general and that of the TTE in particular in ensuring the safety of passengers’ belongings and said that failure to perform these duties constituted negligence. The Commission in fact quoted the Railway Rules which clearly define the responsibilities of the TTE: Rule 17, for example, says that “He (the TTE) shall remain vigilant particularly during night time and ensure that intruders, beggars, hawkers and unauthorised persons do not enter the coach”.

This case has its origin in the train travel undertaken by Bharti Arora, her mother and two family friends on July 20, 2000. Their journey turned into a nightmare. First of all, they found the hook and the belt that is provided by the railways beneath the seat to secure passengers’ baggage missing. And the alarm chain provided in the compartment was also defective and failed to stop the train, when Bharti noticed some miscreants decamping with her baggage. Next, lodging a complaint with the Government Railway Police proved to be an even more difficult task — and could be accomplished only at a subsequent station. Taking into consideration all these factors, the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission awarded the complainant Rs 12,500. This was upheld by the National Commission (Revision Petition No 2241 of 2003).

All these verdicts should force the railways to take appropriate measures to prevent thefts and protect the belongings of passengers.