Why neighbours, family members, boyfriends & husbands must be banned

To prevent rape

A driver affiliated to Uber, an innovative taxi service, is accused of raping a passenger in New Delhi. The driver has been apprehended, and has been found to have a previous conviction of rape. To ensure such incidents do not recur, the Delhi government has banned Uber.

The Delhi government must go further. It should not stop at Uber. It should ban all fleet taxi operators including Meru, Megacabs and so on. Why stop there? Who checks the criminal records of all the black-and-yellow taxis that operate in the city? They should be banned too. A number of tourist taxi permit holders also run taxi services. Since we do not know if their drivers are checked for criminal records, and are all potential rapists, they too should be banned.

Auto rickshaws must be banned too. For similar reasons. Bus, Metro and train drivers should be caged into their driving compartments every morning and released only when their shifts are completed. The keys of the compartment must be deposited with the local police station.

Even this won’t solve the problem. Data released by the Delhi Police show that only 4% of the arrested rapists were strangers (like taxi drivers) and 96% were persons known to the victim or her family.

The Delhi government needs to go after the 96%. Helpfully, Rukmini S’s analysis in The Hindu tells the Delhi authorities just what to do. Almost one-third of the rape cases heard in court involved consenting couples, where the plaintiff’s parents accused the male in court. The Delhi government should ban relationships between adult men and adult women. Boyfriends should be banned. Husbands should be banned too to ensure the problem of marital rape is solved.

The study shows a large number of cases involved neighbours or acquaintances, as well as members of the woman’s immediate family. The Delhi government should ban neighbours, acquaintances and members of immediate family too. After all, few check the criminal records of these people.

The Delhi government should set an example. It must be seen to be doing something strong to protect women. Delhi’s example should be emulated by authorities in other cities.

No bamboo reeds. No flute.

Afterthought: Policemen, soldiers and paramilitary service personnel have also been accused and convicted of rape. Priests, religious leaders and godmen too. We should ban…

Warning: This post is an example of a literary style called satire. It employs sarcasm. It should not be taken literally. This warning has been issued in the public interest when real life and satire are sometimes indistinguishable.

Update:The Union government is considering banning Uber across India.

8 thoughts on “Why neighbours, family members, boyfriends & husbands must be banned”

  1. I get your point, Nitin. This post is hardly funny as any satire is. It is grim.

    Yes, government has been caught napping. With advent of Uber-type services, there is completely unregulated space. Rape maybe is what that brought this to notice to government, and government may well be complicit in making of this situation. But they have NOT banned Uber for rape. Simply for violation of Radio Taxi Scheme, 2006. They have sent a notice to Uber under the section 161 of CrPC for failing to run background checks on drivers before onboarding them. I don’t see anything wrong with it.

    Let’s look at what this Radio taxi scheme covers: it covers verification, pollution, safety standards, permits, fare regulations. One can read it here (PDF)

    I am sorry Uber’s defense ‘we are not radio taxi.’ doesn’t cut it. Are we saying it is ok to be completely unregulated, they never applied for any permission!

    Yes, we may project Delhi government’s reaction as immature, knee-jerk. But, their reasoning is valid, it is for the violation of flouting of 2006 Act. Until Uber proves it is not a ‘radio taxi’, it stands.

    Uber positioned themselves with safety as key feature (link). Frankly, they should be sued. Since we consumers won’t beyond our Twitter outrage, glad government is stalling it.

    Having said, I do hope legal recourse available to challenge the validity of ban takes place as fairly as possible. And right solutions are arrived.

    1. You cannot send a notice under the Radio Taxi Scheme, 2006? Why not? Uber’s defense ‘we are not radio taxi’ does not cut it? Until Uber proves it is not a ‘radio taxi’, it stands.

      Thanks for providing links and doing research. How do your rules apply to a company like Uber which does not have a “fleet”, does not require any domestic infrastructure.

      This is ridiculous. They are patently not a radio taxi. Making service providers jump through hoops is the kind of thing that you probably wanted to get rid off back in May. It’s blatant rent-seeking.

      Our regulations need to keep pace with the world. If they don’t, you cannot blame the service provider. The debate around Uber and social/sharing technologies is a much bigger one– and one which we must have soon.

      I actually do see your point about RTS2006 being the applicable Act in this case. But my contention is that it should not be, the very fact that we had to make them register as a Radio Taxi, and could not accommodate what they really are (an Internet Service) is something that should concern you.

      Finally, while you may like more regulations in theory, the practical history of regulations in India leaves a sour aftertaste… Surely you see the double standards and the favouritism everywhere too

  2. Your satire is awesome as always, but let’s not forget an additional factor:

    The Police and the Govt. usually owns taxis through the Black-Yellow unions, and by providing lucrative permits to the phsycial fleet operators. Uber bypassed all of that, and operated under their nose. This is the REAL reason it was banned. The rape was just the excuse they needed.

  3. Nitin, entertaining satire. But are you sure there are no verification procedures for all the entities you have named? I believe public transport employees have rigorous background checks. Now ofcourse background check clearance is not a guarantee of someone remaining a saint in the future but that is the LEAST one can do. Acting on known facts is the bare due diligence expected from a $48 billion firm. Running a taxi service is a serious matter that captures so many dimensions – safety, efficiency, cost, certainty, civil behaviour, comfort, etc are some of them. Just having an “innovative” app on your smart phone that shows little black cabs moving around and coming to your doorstep faster than others is not enough.
    Would the alleged rapist have committed the same crime if he was working for Megacabs, or Ola, or even for the govt? Probably. But if they had employed him in the first place in a job that requires ferrying other people across remote places at odd times, I would hope that they would have thought twice before hiring him.
    I do believe a ban is stupid and knee-jerk. If Uber is indeed guilty of flouting procedures, then make them pay for it by imposing a hefty fine and/or a committed investment of a billion dollars to help the police and govt overhaul holes in the private transport system. Uber does not need to pay for this, but it needs to be given a chance to bounce back.

  4. Dear all,
    I think ,all people are thinking in the wrong directions.the solution they are giving are not practical.

    The Person who are indulge in the rape crime are not criminals they are worst then animals.
    and to solve this issue, they should be treated like animal, and all the women were given the right to Kill the person if she has the slightest of the doubt, that the person is crossing the boundary. This right should be very similes to the AFSPA ( Armed force special provision acts).

    To be very practical, when the population of the mosquito rises, DO we wait for mosquito to bite us or Just by seeing them we try to kill it by any mean.

    When the bird flu was on the rise, The solution was culling the bird , to save the Human .
    The point i am trying to explain, is that We should take quickest and the severest decision to punish the rapist ir respective of the thing that he has raped or attempted to rape.. Not more than a week

Comments are closed.