preloader image

Loading...

The Legal Affair

Let's talk Law

The Legal Affair

Let's talk Law

Supreme Court Rules that Train Theft is not a Deficiency in Service; Passengers Responsible for Protecting Possessions

Supreme Court Rules that Train Theft is not a Deficiency in Service; Passengers Responsible for Protecting Possessions

Factual Matrix

In the case Station Superintendent v. Surender Bholaa civil appeal against the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission’s decision to dismiss its objection to a ruling that Indian Railways must refund a passenger whose cash was stolen while they were riding by train Rs. 1 lakh.

Supreme Court Decision 

The appeal was accepted, and the orders made by the NCDRC, SCDRC, and District Consumer Forum in the current case were reversed by the Supreme Court Division Bench of justices Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah. In  its ruling in the current case, the Court stated, “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 believed that if a passenger was unable to protect his belongings, the Railways could not be held accountable.

The respondent had brought a claim before the District Consumer Forum asking for compensation for money that had been taken while they were travelling by train. The respondent was accused of wearing a belt and tying Rs 1 lakh in cash around his waist when he was riding a train. The District Forum approved the aforementioned claim and ordered the appellants to pay the respondent Rs 1 lakh. The State and National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission rejected the appeals made in opposition to the aforementioned award. The NCDRC, SCDRC, and District Consumer Forum orders were set aside by the Supreme Court while allowing the current appeal.