MY KOLKATA EDUGRAPH
ADVERTISEMENT
regular-article-logo Tuesday, 26 November 2024

Air India urination: SC asks Centre for more comprehensive guidelines on unruly flyers

During the hearing, the woman's counsel submits the DGCA filed a reply stating everything was in place but the petitioner had suggestions that could be incorporated

PTI New Delhi Published 26.11.24, 04:38 PM
Representational image.

Representational image. Shutterstock picture.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the Centre and aviation regulator DGCA to frame more comprehensive guidelines to control unruly air passengers and observed "something creative" had to be done.

A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan was hearing a plea filed by a 73-year-old woman, on whom a male co-passenger allegedly urinated in an inebriated condition on board an Air India flight in November, 2022.

ADVERTISEMENT

The septuagenarian sought directions to the Centre, the DGCA and all the air carriers to frame a standard operating procedure (SOP) to deal with similar incidents.

The bench, hearing the plea, asked Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati to instruct the authorities concerned to examine and suitably modify the existing guidelines on unruly passengers, in line with the international norms.

Interestingly, Justice Viswanathan shared his own experience while travelling with Justice Surya Kant when they encountered a similar incident.

"We had a recent experience. Two passengers were fully drunk. One went to the washroom and slept off. The other one who was outside had a bag to vomit. The crew was all women and for about 30 to 35 minutes no one could open the door. The crew then requested my co-passenger to open the door and take him out to the seat. It was a 2.40 hour-long flight," Justice Viswanathan said.

The judge remarked something creative needed to be done.

The top court in May, 2023, issued notices to the Centre, Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) and all airlines, including Air India, on the woman's plea.

During the hearing, the woman's counsel submitted the DGCA filed a reply stating everything was in place but the petitioner had suggestions that could be incorporated.

Bhati, representing the Centre, informed the bench that an affidavit was filed and guidelines and circulars were notified for controlling unruly passengers.

The woman filed a PIL in March, 2023, saying she was constrained to moved the top court as Air India and the DGCA failed to treat her with care and responsibility after the unpleasant experience.

The woman referred to seven instances of passenger misconduct on board between 2014 and 2023, alleging they were not dealt with properly by the airline concerned.

The PIL sought a direction to the Centre and the DGCA to ensure that civil aviation requirements norms adhered to the highest standards laid down internationally.

The absence of clear guidelines for media outlets on what requires reporting, whether they ought to make conjectures when matters are sub-judice, and the impact of media coverage based on unverified statements end up impacting the victim as well as the accused, it added.

The petitioner said her intentions were inspired and motivated in the interest of the general public and were a sincere attempt to set up a framework within the airline industry for the prevention of similar incidents and dealing with it in a manner which did not cause additional trauma to the passengers.

The woman sought directions to the DGCA and the airline companies to comply with the legal requirements of the SOPs, operation manuals and reporting protocols to be followed by airline crew and staff.

On January 31, 2023, a Delhi court granted bail to Shankar Mishra, the accused in the case, on a personal bond and a surety.

He was saddled with various conditions, which included not tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses or communicating with them in any manner.

Mishra was also asked not to leave the country without the court's permission and join the investigation and trial whenever summoned by the investigating officer or the court concerned.

Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by The Telegraph Online staff and has been published from a syndicated feed.

Follow us on:
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT