Theft of a passenger's personal belongings from a moving train does not constitute a deficiency in service by the Railways, as the responsibility to protect personal luggage rests with the passenger.

ORDER

1. Heard the learned counsels for both the parties briefly.

2. The matter pertains to loss of a bag of the Complainant from the train while he was travelling in train No.18328 Chhattisgarh Express on 07.08.2015 from Meerut to Bhilai in Sleeper Coach No. S-12.

3. It is the specific allegation of the Complainant that during the course of his journey, the said bag was stolen it contained certain clothes and gold ornaments weighing 40 grams. The Complainant lodged a complaint with the GRP and estimated the loss suffered to be Rs.1,50,000/-. In the absence of the railways responding to the legal notice, the Complainant had filed Consumer Complaint before the learned District Forum vide CC/777/2015.

4. The learned District Forum, vide order dated 21.03.2017, passed the following directions:

“(26) Therefore, on the basis of the entire aforesaid discussion, we accept the complaint filed by the complainant and order that Opposite Parties Nos. 1 and 2 shall jointly and severally pay to the complainant within one month from the date of order the amounts as under-

(1) Opposite Parties Nos. 1 and 2 shall jointly and severally pay to the complainant compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh).

(2) Opposite Parties Nos. 1 and 2 shall jointly and severally also pay to the complainant interest on the aforesaid amount at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of presentation of the complaint, i.e., 11.12.2015, till the date of payment.

(3) Opposite Parties Nos. 1 and 2 shall jointly and severally pay to the complainant Rs. 1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh) as compensation for mental agony.

(4) Opposite Parties Nos. 1 and 2 shall jointly and severally pay to the complainant Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) as litigation costs as well.”

5. As against which, the OP filed an Appeal vide FA/433/2017 and the learned State Commission vide order dated 04.10.2017 directed as follows:

“30. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the appeal filed by the appellants/opposite parties is partly allowed; the directions contained in sub-clauses (1) and (2) of paragraph 26 of the impugned order of the District Forum are affirmed and maintained as they are; however, sub-clauses (3) and (4) are modified to direct that Appellants/Opposite Parties Nos. 1 and 2 shall jointly and severally pay to the respondent/complainant only Rs. 10,000/- (in place of Rs.1,00,000/-) as compensation for mental agony and only Rs. 5,000/- (in place of Rs. 10,000/-) as litigation costs; parties to bear their own costs of the appeal."

6. Aggrieved by the order, the OP/Petitioner filed the present Revision Petition. It is the contention of the OP/Petitioner that Railways has no liability for such losses as per the law. The OPs relied on order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Station Superintendent & Anr. Vs. Surender Bhola Civil Appeal No.7116/2017 observed that:

“We fail to understand as to how the theft could be said to be in any way a deficiency in service by the Railways. If the passenger is not able to protect his own belongings, the Railways cannot be held responsible.”

7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Complainant/Respondent states that once the Complainant had paid for the reserved seat, it is the duty of the Railway officials to ensure that no unauthorized person enters the said compartment. In support of his arguments, he relied upon the decision of this Commission in RP/3164/2017 Northern Railway through its General Manager, Vs. Neetu Gupta & Anr.

8. Heard learned counsels for the parties in detail.

9. It is undisputed that the luggage was stolen in the compartment of the moving train. As regards the liability of the Indian Railways in such cases, the law established by the Hon’ble Supreme