Jewellery stolen from reserved 3AC coach passengers while sleeping: Northern Railway ordered to pay Rs 80,000 as no attendant was present; theft on New Delhi-bound Rajdhani Express

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Pathankot, Punjab, has directed Northern Railway to pay Rs 70,000 to passengers after jewellery kept in their hand baggage was stolen from a reserved 3AC coach, holding that the incident pointed towards negligence and deficiency in service on the part of railway officials.

The commission also ordered the Railways to pay Rs 10,000 as compensation for mental harassment and agony, along with 6% annual interest on the awarded amount from the date of filing the complaint until its realisation.

The order was passed in the case of Kalu Ram and others versus Northern Railway and others, where the passengers alleged that their belongings were stolen from a reserved 3AC coach due to negligence on the part of railway officials.

What happened inside the reserved 3AC coach?

According to the case details, the complainants were travelling in a reserved 3AC coach after purchasing valid railway tickets.

During the journey, their belongings kept inside a hand bag were stolen by unauthorised persons who allegedly entered the reserved coach.

The stolen items included jewellery, for which the passengers later submitted supporting documents, including bills of the lost ornaments.

Following the theft, the passengers reported the incident to railway authorities and also lodged a Zero FIR at their destination.

They later approached the consumer forum, alleging that the Railways failed in their duty to provide safety and security to passengers travelling in reserved coaches.

Why did passengers blame Northern Railway?

The complainants argued that they had paid for reserved accommodation and that the Railways were responsible for ensuring that unauthorised people did not enter reserved coaches.

They alleged that the absence of proper monitoring and lack of a coach attendant at the relevant time allowed outsiders to enter the coach and steal their belongings.

The passengers claimed that the railway administration's failure amounted to deficiency in service.

What was Northern Railway's defence?

The Railways argued that the consumer forum did not have jurisdiction in matters involving theft of luggage, citing provisions of the Railways Act.

It relied upon Sections 97 and 100 of the Railways Act, claiming that railway authorities were not responsible for loss of luggage unless negligence or misconduct on the part of railway officials was established.

The Railways also argued that it had no prior information regarding the theft.

However, the consumer commission rejected these arguments after examining the evidence.

Why did the commission hold Railways responsible?

The commission observed that the railway's own documents contradicted its stand that it had no information about the theft.

The records showed that the passengers had reported the incident to the Railway Protection Force (RPF) escort.

The commission noted that once the Railways acknowledged that its RPF personnel had received the complaint, it could not simultaneously claim that railway authorities were unaware of the incident.

The commission also highlighted that the theft occurred inside a reserved 3AC coach and that the complainants had specifically stated that no coach attendant was available at that time.

According to the order, the Railways failed to produce the duty roster or any evidence proving that the coach attendant was present and performing assigned duties during the journey.

The commission said that the Railways had withheld the best available evidence, which was in its own possession, leading to an adverse inference against it.

What did the commission say about passenger safety in reserved coaches?

While examining the matter, the commission relied upon an earlier case involving railway responsibility for passenger safety.

It observed that passengers travelling in reserved coaches after paying fares are entitled to safety and security, including protection from theft committed by unauthorised persons who gain entry into reserved compartments.

The commission noted that railway authorities have a responsibility to prevent such incidents when negligence by railway staff contributes to the loss.

What compensation did the Railways have to pay?

After considering the evidence, the commission partly allowed the complaint and directed Northern Railway to:

• Pay Rs 70,000 to the complainants for the loss suffered.
• Pay 6% annual interest on this amount from the date of filing the complaint until payment.
• Pay an additional Rs 10,000 for mental harassment and agony.

The amount was ordered to be paid within one month of receiving the certified copy of the order.

The commission further stated that if the payment was not made within the given period, the complainants would be entitled to 12% annual interest on the entire amount from the date of filing the complaint until realisation.

The order was announced on June 30, 2026.

Check the case judgement here: