Most people do not even bother to report petty crimes because they believe that the effort is not worth it.
Crimes in and on trains have become so common that they fail to make news any more. Most people do not even bother to report petty crimes because they believe that the effort is not worth it and because they believe they have no rights against the railways. However, not all consumers are like that. All this will change after the order of the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission in Bala Chandrakant vs. Northern Railway.
Bala was travelling from Delhi to Tamilnadu by the Tamilnadu Express. She boarded the train at New Delhi railway station. As the train moved out of the station, a stranger standing at the exit door of an adjacent compartment put his hand inside the compartment through the window and snatched her mangalsutra. Bala’s husband reported the matter to the train supervisor and filed an FIR with the railway police. The criminal was never apprehended and the railways closed the case as ‘undetected’.
Bala sued the railways for not protecting her property while on a train belonging to the railways in the Delhi Consumer District Forum. The district forum dismissed the complaint. Bala then took the case to the state commission, seeking compensation for her loss.
The state commission relied on an earlier order of the national commission which had stated that the railways were responsible for the life and property of any person on the train, and awarded Bala Rs5,000 as compensation, holding the railways responsible for deficiency of service.
Both parties were dissatisfied with the order of the state commission. Consequently, both parties filed independent review petitions in the national commission.
The national commission noted that the consumer had clearly stated in her FIR and also in the lower courts that the gold chain, which was stolen, weighed about 5 tolas. It further noted that the railways had never challenged the veracity of this statement.
The commission also held that security on railway platforms and within the trains is part of the services to be rendered to the consumer by the railway and by not affording this the railway was clearly liable for deficiency in service.
The commission awarded the consumer a consolidated sum of Rs25,000 as compensation for the lost mangalsutra as well as cost of litigation. The order of the state commission was modified to that extent and the order confirmed.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}