The Supreme Court of India has overturned a Consumer Forum verdict and ruled that Indian Railways cannot be held accountable or responsible for the loss of a passenger's personal property. The decision was taken in case of a theft that occurred aboard a train where one lakh rupees was kept in the belt of a passenger that was stolen during the journey. The passenger approached the District Consumer Forum which allowed the claim and directed Railways to reimburse the claim to the Passenger.
Join Now! India's Largest directory of lawyers and legal professionals
This decision sets a significant precedent for the Indian Railways' responsibility in cases of theft or loss of passengers' property. It emphasises the necessity for passengers to exercise caution and implement the required safety measures in order to guarantee the security of their belongings while riding trains.
The Indian Railways cannot be held responsible for the criminal acts of third parties, such as theft or robbery, according to the Supreme Court's ruling, unless there is proof of incompetence or misconduct on the side of the railway administration. The court ruled that the protection of passengers' items cannot be guaranteed by railroads beyond what is reasonable.
The Bench opined that theft of personal belongings of the Passenger does not fall within “deficiency of service” by Railways. “We fail to understand as to how the theft could be said to be in any way a deficiency in service by the Railways.
The court emphasized that it is ultimately the passengers' obligation to protect their own personal belongings. In order to secure their things while travelling by train, it was advised that travellers use reasonable caution and adopt the required safety procedures. Accordingly, the Bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah set aside orders passed by Consumer forum whereby Railways was directed to reimburse the stolen amount of cash to the Passenger.
Be a part of India's Largest Lawyers Directory?
Join Lawyers Directory!Accordingly, the Bench has set aside the orders passed by the District Consumer Forum.