Politics1 min read

When women aren't safe on India's streets, who can be held legally responsible?

By · Via Times of India · Published by Everything Blog

In short

While infrastructure failures like absent streetlights do not instantly trigger state negligence, public agencies remain accountable when they ignore documented, identifiable risks under their control. Under Section 173 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, police must record cognizable crimes through mechanisms such as a Zero FIR, with female officers designated to take statements for specified offences against women. However, systemic barriers like gender bias and compromise pressure frequently impede these statutory processes. Victims can challenge non-compliant officers through penal provisions, magistrate petitions, or writ proceedings.

Key points

  • Public authorities are legally accountable for foreseeable public risks and known hazards…: Public authorities are legally accountable for foreseeable public risks and known hazards rather than guaranteeing complete immunity from third-party crimes.
  • The Supreme Court precedent in Lalita Kumari establishes that officers cannot legally ref…: The Supreme Court precedent in Lalita Kumari establishes that officers cannot legally refuse the registration of cognizable offences.
  • Aggrieved individuals can address police inaction by escalating reports to a Superintende…: Aggrieved individuals can address police inaction by escalating reports to a Superintendent of Police or petitioning a magistrate.

Sources checked by our analysis pipeline: 1

NEW DELHI: A woman is harassed on a poorly lit street. She approaches the police, but they refuse to register her complaint. Can she hold the authorities accountable for failing to protect her? And if unsafe public infrastructure or police inaction contributes to the harm she suffers, can she seek compensation from the government or a municipal body?

Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution guarantee equality, protection against discrimination and the right to life and personal liberty. The Supreme Court has interpreted the right to life to include living with dignity.

Vishal Gehrana, partner at Karanjawala & Co, said these guarantees inform the State’s responsibilities but do not make the government an insurer against every criminal act. Police must respond to complaints and investigate offences, while agencies responsible for roads, parks, streetlights and public transport must discharge their assigned duties.

“The distinction is between guaranteeing that no crime will occur and taking reasonable measures to prevent foreseeable risks. The law cannot promise the former, but public authorities must discharge their lawful duties and respond appropriately when risks or…

Politics