What do the Courts say in relation to Theft occurring on the Trains/Railways?

Liability of the Railways in relation to Theft occurring on the Trains/Railways

In the earlier post, we talked about the possible immediate steps that could be taken in case a theft occurs inside a train/railway. In the present post, we shall endeavour to under the relevant legal provisions and judicial pronouncements in this respect.

 

Important Legal Provisions

 

Section 100 of the Railways Act, 1989

 

“Responsibility as carrier of luggage - A railway administration shall not be responsible for the loss, destruction, damage, deterioration of non-delivery of any luggage unless a railway servant has booked the luggage and given a receipt therefore and in the case of luggage which is carried by the passenger in his charge, unless it is also proved that the loss, destruction, damage or deterioration was due to the negligence or misconduct on its part or on the part of any of its servants”.

 

Duties of the TTEs and Railway Staff in relation to Theft

The relevant Circular issued by the Railways can be read here.

 

1. In case of any theft occurring on the train, the Superintendent/TTEs on train are required to guide the passenger to the GRP Escort Party, if travelling by the Train or else make a blank FIR and submit the same to the first GRP Post (Railway Police) available at the scheduled stoppage of the train for further action.

 

2. TTEs are required to be presented at the allotted coach and if more than one coach is to be manned, give frequent visits to all such coaches.

 

3. The TTEs/Superintendents must report to their superiors about any person who is causing any trouble or is not performing his/her duties properly. He shall also be vigilant in ensuring “Customer Satisfaction.”

 

4. The TTEs/Superintendents shall maintain a Complaint Book and make the same available to the passengers, as and when required.

 

5. It is the duty of the Train Superintendents/TTEs to make sure that no unauthorized hawking and begging takes place on the Train.

 

6. The Train Superintendent/TTEs should also ensure that the reserved coaches are secured and latched when on the run and the vestibule doors are bolted at night and supervised.

 

7. It is the responsibility of the Train Superintendent to ascertain the details of the staff working on the train and ensure that they perform their duties properly.

 

Important Case-Laws

 

Northern Railways v. Balbir Singh, First Appeal No. 311/2014, State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Union Territory, Chandigarh

 

In reserved coaches, it is the duty of the TTE to ensure that no intruder enters the reserved compartment of the Railways. In this case, theft of two suitcases took place from a reserved compartment and the Hon’ble Commission said that it cannot be ruled out that “some intruder must have entered the reserved compartment who committed the theft of the suitcases. Had the TTE of the Railways been vigilant and careful then the entry of the intruders/some unauthorized persons must have been prevented in the coach during the night and the complainant did not have to face the mental agony and harassment due to the theft of his suitcases.”

 

Hence, it was held that the TTE of the train failed to perform his duties, which amounted to negligence and also deficiency in service, as per codified duties of the TTE.

 

P.A. Narayanan v. Union of India, (1998) 3 SCC 67

 

The Court observed that breach of common law duty of reasonable care lies upon all carriers including the Railways. In such cases, it cannot be said that the omission on the part of the railway officials can be said to be wholly unforeseen or beyond their control. Such standard of care is strict, and fault based. Such a liability is not inconsistent with the scheme of the Railways Act of 1890.

 

Station Master, Indian Railway & Anr. v. Sunil Kumar, 2018 SCC OnLine NCDRC 440

 

A person travelling on reserved berths in a reserved coach after paying the fares and purchasing the tickets is right in “agitating that the railways was responsible for safety and security of person and hand-held baggage, including from unknown persons who gained entry unauthorizedly and committed theft (the railways was undoubtedly responsible for theft of hand-held baggage from running train)….. It would undoubtedly be self-evident (to one and all) that safety and security of person and hand-held baggage in running train is a fundamental concern of each and every passenger - consumer.”

 

It was further stated that a reasonable man would rightly assume that his person and luggage are safe and secure in running trains especially in reserved coaches.

 

Union of India v. Ajay Kumar Agarwalla,  2015 SCC OnLine NCDRC 2956

 

It is the duty of the TTE to make sure that the doors of the reserved coaches are latched at night and if the same is not the case, then it is a possibility that “since the doors of the coach i.e. main entrance doors were not kept latched during night, some unauthorized person entered the coach in which the complainants were travelling, committed theft of their suitcases and then left the coach either through a main entrance door when the train stopped at a railway station or he was able to move to another compartment through the vestibule doors which had not been locked.”

 

Union of India v. Syed Mubuddin Rizvi, 2016 SCC OnLine NCDRC 2196

 

When there is no evidence that the doors of the coaches have actually been closed except at the railway stations and where neither the TTE nor the Coach Conductor were present in the coach, it could be said that there is negligence on part of the railways if any theft occurs and the railways is liable to compensate for the loss sustained by the passenger.

 

General Manager, South Central Railway v. Jagannath Mohan Shinde, 2012 SCC OnLine NCDRC 183

 

If any unauthorized person is permitted to be present on the reserved compartment of a train, then Section 100 of the Indian Railways Act would not be of any help to the Railways in absolving them from any liability since anyways the Railways is responsible as a carrier of luggage if it is proved that their negligence on its part.

 

General Manager (General) Northern Railway v. Lakhanji Purwar, 2016 SCC OnLine NCDRC 2515

 

If a TTE is not present in a reserved coach of a train and if any theft occurs in such reserved coach, “then the theft of the articles of the complainant happened solely on account of the deficiency on the part of the Indian Railways in rendering services to him by not deputing a TTE to remain present in the coach throughout the journey.”

 

Concluding Remarks

 

We see that there are ample of responsibilities that have been casted upon the railway authorities not just by the Courts but also the various legal provisions. Hence, do not be afraid in telling the same to the railway authorities in case a theft occurs on a Train. It is their legal responsibility to take all the above-mentioned steps. You are paying for the ride and you have all the right to avail the reasonable services that could be expected from any carrier and assert the same to them.