The onus of the safety of passengers is on the public transport operator

What is the liability, if any, of the an entity in charge of a public transport service, be it road, rail, water or air? In the context of the rape that occurred in Delhi recently, where the accused was a driver with the taxi service ‘Uber’, the question acquires greater importance. In this latest Delhi case, the taxi service is covered under laws for ‘public carriers’, which assigns the onus for any crime committed on the owners and operators of taxi services. Is there a precedent for something like this? Actually, in context with public services like transport, there is.

In chairman, Railway Board vs Chandrima Das case, a practising advocate of the Calcutta High Court filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the various railway authorities of the Eastern Railway claiming compensation for the victim (Hanufa Khatoon)—a Bangladeshi national—who was raped at the Howrah Station by railway security men. The High Court awarded Rs10 lakh as compensation. The State appealed arguing that:

a) The railway was not liable to pay compensation to the victim because she was a foreigner.

b) That the remedy lies in the domain of private law and not public law, i.e., the victim should have approached the civil court for seeking damages; and should have not come to the High Court under Article 226.

The Supreme Court observed: “Where public functionaries are involved and the matter relates to the violation of fundamental rights or the enforcement of public duties, the remedy would be avoidable under public law. It was more so, when it was not a mere violation of any ordinary right, but the violation of fundamental rights was involved—as the petitioner was a victim of rape, which a violation of fundamental right of every person guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.”

It is time the authorities and policy-makers take a harder look at the ‘public duties’ of yellow-plate commercial vehicle operators all over the country. Even in the Nirbhaya case, while the focus was rightly on the high incidence of rapes in Delhi, the subsidiary issue of safety in public transport was barely looked at by the authorities. This latest case shows up this very lack in India’s policy-making and enforcement environment.

On the other side of the spectrum are people, who drive cabs or operate them. More than a few I know have a strict ‘no drunks in taxi’ policy, because of the risk of vomiting, fighting or public nuisance. I think that attitude by good fleet operators and drivers will start taking precedence soon.

Low Oil Prices Make It Cheaper To Pollute

Auto major Mahindra is trying its best to enliven the battery-powered vehicles market in India, for personal transport (with their offering called ‘e2o’) and for commercial vehicles in the three- and four-wheeler formats. Commercial success appears to have eluded them in India, for now; but the increased concern by the National Green Tribunal on removing older and more polluting vehicles from city roads may soon include solutions which make it more cost-effective for prospective buyers to go in for battery-operated vehicles.

However, the steep decline in global crude oil prices, may stymie these plans. The effect of oil prices will become clear only if some benefit of lower prices is passed on to consumers in the form of reduced taxation. For now, Mahindra has tweaked the ‘e2o’ to provide more mileage per recharge and better seating, as well as minor modifications in design, based on feedback from customers.

(Veeresh Malik started and sold a couple of companies, is now back to his first love—writing. He is also involved in helping small and midsize family-run businesses re-invent themselves.)