Women Safety Archives - DU Beat - Delhi University's Independent Student Newspaper

Arts & Culture

On Record with Shreya V. Basu

By DU Beat October 18, 2026

DU Beat sits in conversation with Ms. Shreya Basu, Head of Partnerships and Growth at Safetipin, to discuss how the narrative around women’s safety has changed and the gaps that we are yet to overcome.

Rishika: When we talk about making spaces safer for women, there’s often a move towards more CCTVs and more police. How do we make sure that women’s safety doesn’t become synonymous with surveillance and restricting women’s behaviour?

Shreya: I think the first thing to understand is that safety and security are not the same thing. Safety is about feeling free from fear. Surveillance is a part of safety, so it doesn’t need to be completely taken away, but it has to be backed by trust and accountability. If you’re going to put up CCTV cameras, I have to feel safe, and I have to feel confident that there is someone who will help me out. The same goes for police personnel. It’s not just about putting up the infrastructure, but it also has to do with how you maintain it. It is crucial to ask who’s managing the space and how it impacts your day-to-day activity and movement in that space. It’s really important to find that balance. So, security is not bad, but security is not everything, and security without trust and accountability is only a curative measure if they care about it. We should look at safety as prevention because it’s a feeling of fear that we’re trying to eliminate.

Rishika: You spoke about the need to strike a balance between security and trust. In an ideal world, how do you think this balance should be achieved? While safety requires structural changes in how spaces are designed and managed, it also involves addressing societal attitudes and the patriarchal mindsets that shape how we perceive and approach women’s safety. What are your thoughts on this?

Shreya: First, there are two kinds of surveillance: actual surveillance and natural surveillance. In actual surveillance, in theory and in an ideal world, all the systems and institutions in a government work for the citizen. They’re supposed to be working for our welfare, but who is the citizen they’re realistically working for is the question. Because men are able to walk around. Women are not. So it’s also: who are you designing the system for? Who are you including at the table? Who are you actually asking these questions to? Because if a bunch of men sit around and discuss and design a public space, they’ll design it in a way that they understand. And that’s not their fault; that’s their reality. So, for it to be inclusive and responsive to the needs of other genders and other ages, you have to include those people in the conversation when designing. And I think the point of maintenance is very important. You can’t just do one thing and say, now it will be done. You have to continue it. It has to keep building.

Then there’s the concept of natural surveillance—activity on the streets, eyes on the streets—which changes the game. If you have space with vendors that women are actively using, as well as female vendors, you will feel more comfortable being out there. If you see more of you outside, you will feel comfortable being outside. I looked at the Safetipin data from 2023 to 2025, and what we found was that when there are no people around, both men and women feel unsafe. But as the number of people increases, the feeling of safety for men and women both increases. However, for men, the gender composition doesn’t matter. For women, the gender composition does matter. That’s why we have a gender parameter in our audit. And the feeling of safety differs for men and women when those are different, and that’s what matters.

So, activity on the street first: if you have a vendor, if you have shopkeepers, they add life to the street, and they take ownership of the street. Then you don’t feel alone. But what it also does is invite more women to use it.

What type of vendors do you have? What type of things are you selling? What type of seating is around it? Are you creating a public space where women feel comfortable to actually be? Because there’s very little room for women to be in public spaces just for leisure, for pleasure, for loitering. And it’s very important that we question why that is for all women, so that’s the conversation we need to change. Something like when Safetipin puts up their tea stall, wherein we tell women to come sit and have chai. You don’t need to be on the move all the time. Social norms won’t change quickly. They will not change in our lifetime, 100%. But infrastructure informs social change. So we can start there.

If you look at just the difference between what happened in the Nirbhaya case and the Aastha Kunj case, at the time of Nirbhaya, the instant reaction was, “Let’s install panic buttons, let’s put out a Nirbhaya fund, and let’s kill the people who did this.” In the Aastha Kunj case, it’s “Let’s do audits of public parks. Let’s look at public infrastructure. Let’s look at street lighting.” So in the last 15 years, the conversation has changed. Safety in public spaces has become mainstream, largely due to the work of feminist organisations in Delhi and in India. We have to acknowledge that it is changing very slowly, but it is. So we have to keep pushing that forward. We can’t just say it’s okay that this happened. No. But at least we’re addressing the real problem. I don’t know if they’re doing it fully correctly, but at least the wording is right. It’s not just “Kill the rapists”. I think they should be convicted, and a lot more should happen. But we’re also looking at the streets and the parks, and public toilets. If you don’t put public toilets in places, there is no reason women can come and hang out.

Rishika: Safetipin measures gender diversity in a space. But women may not be present because a space feels unsafe, and then their absence can itself become part of what makes the space feel unsafe. How can we break this vicious loop?

Shreya: That’s true. I think we also don’t feel comfortable going out alone, and I understand that. Because even if the street is completely safe, you may still not use it, because other streets are not safe. We’ve accustomed ourselves to change internally before we even question what’s happening outside.

I think that community-mobilisation activities like Jagori’s ‘Sleep in the Park’, Why Loiter’s walks around places, and Safetipin’s night safety walks are very important. Going around with a group of women, including men, also, that’s not a problem; it builds your confidence. Of course, your security and safety are very important. The reason you’re not moving around the city is that you don’t feel safe, because you’ve never done it.

It’s also okay if you don’t want to; I think that’s also fair. Maybe somebody doesn’t want to go out in the evening; sometimes they’re just lazy. We can’t say that every woman has to be an activist in everything she does. I think it’s fair to say we need a break also. But when you want to go out, you should. You want to reclaim a park, go reclaim a park; go hang out there.

How you use a space is shaped by social norms, and social norms do get created based on how you also act in those social public spaces. So I would say that’s a very community-driven feeling. It’ll increase the gender diversity; of course, don’t get me wrong, infrastructure does have to change, and other people also have to change. But this part we can do.

I don’t think the onus of my safety should be on me. Never. If something happens to me ever, it won’t be my fault. I can wear what I want, I can do what I want, say what I want, be whoever. But the onus of my enjoyment can be on me. If I try to figure out how I can look for my joy, if my joy is about being out, I should be able to access that. The negative cannot be on me; that’s on the perpetrator. But my happiness and what I can enjoy, I can do with my friends, my community, and I can choose to do that.

Rishika: Back in March of 2015, LSR and Jagori conducted a Safetipin audit of the areas around LSR, and 11 years later, Safetipin and Jagori have returned to almost the same stretch and found many of the same concerns. Students reported feeling uncomfortable in the space in 2015, and students still feel uncomfortable there in 2026. What does that tell us about the limits of producing evidence?

Shreya: I think the gap is what you do with that data, and how you make it actionable. Getting a woman’s feelings about a space is not enough, so the 8 other parameters I’m collecting—that’s what the action items are. Let’s say Safetipin does the audit with a bunch of students; we have found that you feel uncomfortable here; we have figured out what the reasons are for the parameters; we can give actionable recommendations on what needs to be done. Who will do it now is a little bit of an issue. And I’m not saying that’s an excuse. I’m saying it’s a very, very poor reality of the world we live in that we can’t get that done. But if you fight enough, if you push enough, you may even get the streetlights installed, but will they work? You may get a vendor for one day, but will they stay? So, what is the longer-term vision? And I think that’s why some of these things are slower, because the point is, it shouldn’t be a one-time thing. Implementation is not just doing it once. And I think that’s also what we have to understand: implementation is a longer process. Projects can’t just end.

Shreya V. Basu, Head of Partnerships and Growth at Safetipin

Interview Conducted by

Rishika Jain

[email protected]

Image Credit: Shreya V. Basu

Read Also: Dilli-Dallying After Dark

Keep Reading

Campus Central

Dilli-Dallying After Dark

By DU Beat October 18, 2026

Students of colleges across Delhi University assess safety outside their colleges across nine parameters using the My Safetipin app, revealing the terms and conditions of mobility around campus.

11 years of safety around LSR

In March 2015, Lady Shri Ram College’s Committee Against Sexual Harassment, the Aung San Suu Kyi Centre for Peace and the Department of Political Science conducted a safety audit from LSR to Moolchand. It rated the space as ‘uncomfortable’. The audit was meant to give students agency and local ownership: a safety map based on factors such as lighting, openness and visibility, to help outstation students choose PG accommodation. According to professors back then, the initiative focused on taking immediate action rather than waiting on institutional intervention. The extent of subsequent progress remains uncertain.

Eleven years later, on 24 September 2026, another audit was conducted in the lane adjacent to the college’s back gate, following the alleged rape of a 17-year-old girl nearby. Hosted by Safetipin and Jagori, the audit saw 8–10 LSR students use the My Safetipin app to rate the lane across nine parameters: lighting, openness, visibility, people, security, walking path, public transport, gender diversity, and feeling.

The lane scored low across all nine parameters, with the average rating for feeling indicating that the space was frightening and uncomfortable. It is only in a group that one would feel safe travelling here.

When night falls in North Campus

The five audits conducted around North Campus colleges: Hindu College, Hansraj College, Miranda House, Shri Ram College of Commerce and Kirori Mal College, reveal a mixed picture of safety around campuses. While several locations scored relatively well on openness, concerns surrounding lighting, security, and gender usage raise questions about safety in these areas.

An audit outside Hindu College, conducted at 4:08 pm, recorded no street lighting. As the auditor noted, ‘From 6 pm, there will be no light as there is no street lamp,’ warning that the area becomes ‘highly unsafe for women unless they are travelling in groups’. Similarly, Hansraj College recorded low scores for lighting and security, alongside moderate ratings for openness, visibility and gender usage.

At Miranda House, the audit recorded moderate lighting and visibility but low security and gender usage. Although public transport accessibility received a high score, the limited presence of women raises questions about whether connectivity alone ensures safety. SRCC presented a comparatively ‘safer’ picture, scoring highly on security and walk paths, with the auditor reporting feeling ‘comfortable’ in the space. The audit conducted near Kirori Mal College at 8:22 pm offers the most relevant evidence for examining safety after dark. Despite high scores for openness, visibility, the presence of people, and public transport, the location received low ratings for lighting, security, walking paths, and gender usage.

These findings suggest that favourable physical infrastructure does not automatically ensure women’s safety in public spaces, although it may contribute to a sense of security. However, only one of the five audits was conducted after 8 pm, and gender diversity was rated low rather than absent. Therefore, it is difficult to determine whether the presence of women in North Campus declines significantly after dark.

Safety and sundown in South and Off Campus

Students from seven colleges across South Campus and off-campus areas identified gaps in mobility outside their campuses. While these spaces scored highly on openness and walkability, perceptions of safety were shaped by gendered usage and temporal conditions.

Audits around Gargi College and Kamala Nehru College, conducted near the gates between 5:32 pm and 6:46 pm, revealed a stark decline in women’s presence after sunset. While the streets consistently scored highly on openness and walkability, students reported poor lighting, with illumination coming primarily from secondary sources, such as the colleges themselves. The audits also revealed limited public transport accessibility and a sharp decline in gender diversity as evening fell.

In an audit conducted outside Gate 2 of Gargi College, the user, a second-year student who uses the space daily, wrote, ‘Streetlights are not functional’. Locals commented that the police leave after sunset. All women PCR vans are nowhere near. The area is fairly deserted except for the traffic. A similar picture emerged outside Gate 2 of Gargi College, where the auditor reported ‘natural light blocked by trees’ and described the stretch as deserted. These factors, compounded by relatively few or no eyes on the street, the absence of security personnel, and extremely low gender diversity, contributed to students reporting a feeling of being ‘alarmed’. They said they would avoid the space if they could.

Comparatively, Gate 1 of Gargi College was reported to have better lighting and a larger crowd in the surrounding area, contributing to a feeling of being ‘secure’, although the location still scored low on security and gender diversity.

Outside Gates 1 and 2 of Kamala Nehru College, situated close to Gargi College, the reported feeling returned to ‘frightening’ and ‘uncomfortable’, with scarce lighting around 6:30 pm, distant public transport, and gender diversity reported as ‘no one in sight’. In contrast, the area scored highly on openness, and the walking paths were good enough to run on. The auditor also added, ‘There are no working street lamps on the entire Siri Fort road.’ An audit conducted at 5:32 pm, before sunset, recorded adequately lit surroundings and a higher, though still low, female presence. By 6:39 pm, gender usage had dropped to zero.

The perception of low safety persists even in broad daylight. Outside Delhi College of Arts and Commerce, an audit was conducted at 1:11 pm, and almost every parameter was rated poorly. With virtually no street lighting, no eyes on the street, undiversified gender usage, unavailable public transport, and no security, the student reported feeling ‘frightened’ in the space surrounding the college. ‘It is a construction site, and everywhere there are construction workers even during the daytime. The way to the nearest residential area is all but worse,’ the auditor wrote.

Outside Jesus and Mary College, audits were conducted at 10:03 am and 5:17 pm. While the ratings for the different parameters fluctuated between the two times, students reported the feeling in the space as ‘acceptable’. Outside Venkateswara College, an audit conducted at 12:41 pm reported fairly diverse gender usage and an overall feeling of ‘acceptable’.

Outside Deshbandhu College, an audit conducted at 6:47 pm recorded adequate performance across all parameters except security. ‘Even though there are lights, they are not enough, as there are a few blind spots. There are no security guards over here,’ the auditor wrote. An audit conducted outside Shivaji College at 4:35 pm recorded decent scores across all parameters. The auditor, however, wrote, ‘Though it’s good in daytime, at night it’s extremely unsafe’.

For many students, the college campus functions as a safe island. But what happens when we step outside? What remains is a stretch of road that the data rates as frightening, and a city that, after dark, is simply smaller for women.

Rishika Jain and Sheetal Mishra

[email protected]

Image Credit: Rishika for DU Beat

Keep Reading

DUB News

Second-year student of North Campus alleges stalking and harassment; 23-year-old man booked

By DU Beat October 2, 2026

On Tuesday, police registered a case against a 23-year-old man for stalking and harassing a Second-Year student of North Campus over the past three months.

A second-year student of North Campus, Delhi University, alleged stalking and harassment by a 23-year-old man over the past three months.

The 22-year-old, hailing from Kerala and residing in Vijay Nagar, approached the police this Tuesday fearing for her safety. According to the cops, the woman knew the man through an acquaintance and also pointed out that he was a DU graduate who lived in Christian Colony, Maurice Nagar. She alleged that the man would follow her from college to her residence every day and repeatedly call her as well as her friends even after her objections. She added that the accused repeatedly said that he wanted to marry her.

A case against the accused was registered at Maurice Nagar Police Station who was called in for questioning. The woman’s statement was recorded in front of the magistrate on Wednesday.

A friend of the woman, who wished to remain anonymous, said, “We are participating in protests for our safety, to be able to walk on the streets without any fear, and this is what is happening to our friend.”

According to sources, the accused was arrested by Delhi Police on Thursday. Investigation is currently underway.

The case comes shortly after another incident in which two Delhi University postgraduate students allegedly faced stalking and harassment by three men travelling in an SUV near Hakikat Park in Mukherjee Nagar.

The incidents have unfolded against the backdrop of growing student concerns over women’s safety and their ability to access and move through public spaces without fear. Women students at Delhi University and other colleges have also been raising concerns through protests and public discussions around safety, mobility and accountability.

With the latest case now under investigation, questions surrounding the safety of women students travelling between campuses, residences and public spaces continue to remain a concern.

Image Credits: Hindustan Times

Sahaj J
[email protected]

Keep Reading

Campus Central

Gunshots Fired Near LSR Back Gate; Incident Linked to Astha Kunj Minor Assault Case

By DU Beat September 22, 2026

Lady Shri Ram College (LSR) woke up to a harrowing sight as gunshots and a police encounter near its back gate left an accused in the Astha Kunj Park sexual assault case injured in the leg, police said.

A 17-year-old girl was allegedly sexually assaulted by three men at Astha Kunj Park near Kalkaji Mandir on the evening of 21st September. The subsequent police encounter with one of the accused took place near the back gate of Lady Shri Ram College (LSR), where the accused was allegedly shot in the leg during an exchange of fire with police.

The victim’s statement reports that three people, posing as policemen, had separated the victim from her friend, taking her towards a secluded area, and threatening her with firearms and knives, subsequently sexually raping and assaulting her.

The victim was medically examined at AIIMS, while the Crime Team and Forensic Science Laboratory team examined the alleged scene and collected relevant exhibits.

The police statement informed of action near LSR Back Gate, Amar Colony, where a trap laid by the police had been successful in intercepting one of the accused, who opened fire on the police. The press statement read,

“During the exchange of fire, one round hit the bullet-proof jacket of HC Rajesh. In self-defence, HC Rajesh fired two rounds, one of which hit the accused in his right leg. The injured accused was immediately shifted to AIlMS Trauma Centre for treatment.”

In the hours after the incident, students of Lady Shri Ram College for Women, University of Delhi arrived in panic, having spotted policemen and heavy barricading at the Back Gate of the college, alongside reporters and a bloody investigation scene.

The LSR Students’ Union released a notification that all classes after 12:00 PM stand cancelled in light of the incident.

Image Credits: Sheetal for DU Beat

Report by Aaratrika Ghosh
[email protected]

Investigation by Sheetal Mishra and Rishika Jain

Keep Reading

Campus Central

Female Students Face Sexual Harassment in North Campus

By DU Beat January 26, 2026

Several female students at the Delhi School of Journalism and Miranda House had faced repeated instances of sexual harassment, as men deliberately exposed their genitalia, proceeding to perform vulgar and obscene acts in front of the first-year students.

Female students at the Delhi School of Journalism and Miranda House have reported multiple instances of sexual harassment. The first such incident was reported to have occurred to two first-year students of the Delhi School of Journalism on the 31st of December 2025, on Cavalry Lane. The students were on route to the Vishwavidyalaya metro station at around 12:30 pm when an unidentified man indecently exposed his genitalia to the students as he proceeded to masturbate in front of them. The students found the incident “alarming and deeply traumatising,” and fled the scene, fearing for their safety.

A similar incident was also reported outside Miranda House. On 15th January, four first-year students, while exiting the college campus, encountered a man in his late thirties masturbating in broad daylight near the bus stand, outside the third gate of the college. The students approached the nearby pink booth, where they were informed by the female officer that a male personnel would be called to handle the situation.

One of the students later stated, “The man continued the act and looked at us while doing it. It was extremely disturbing and distressing.” It’s also crucial to note that this occurred in the presence of a female officer. The students also contacted the women’s helpline. Subsequently, the male police officer also arrived at the spot and detained the individual. According to the police, the man was drunk and not in a stable state of mind.

The students stated that they did not formally inform anyone else in the college, except that one of them contacted a senior from the college ICC, who provided contact details of a lawyer for legal guidance, however, no FIR was filed.

For our own sanity and well-being, we chose not to escalate the matter further. However, it’s really scary to walk that same path every day, and to think about what if he recognised us, stalked us, or came after us someday.”

Apart from the students involved, another girl was present who also noted the events. They also reported that a similar incident had previously occurred to a first-year student on a DTC bus, suggesting that such incidents could be recurring.

What is particularly concerning is that the incident took place in proximity to a women’s college, and near a bus stand, with frequent movement of women, children, and students from nearby colleges. The fact that such an act occurred in a public, highly populated space highlights serious concerns regarding safety and monitoring in the area.

Yet again, on January 16th, 2026, just a day after the incident outside Miranda House had taken place, the same two students from DSJ would be subjected to a repeated event of sexual misconduct as an event identical to the first reoccurred, at the same location, once again in broad daylight.

One of the victims said,

The man made eye contact with us as he did obscene gestures in public. We are devastated and extremely disheartened because it feels as if our right to freely walk on the streets has been curtailed.” “It still disturbs me that he felt free to do this in public with no fear of consequences. How that man remembered to cover his face but not his genitalia is unbeknownst to me,” said the other.

The experience was far from isolated. Upon hearing about the events of December 31st and January 16th, several other students at DSJ reported having had similar experiences. First-year student Aastha Upadhyay stated,

Ever since I’ve known about these incidents, I’ve dreaded walking down that path or even coming to college for that matter, which is a shame because I quite like what I’m studying. I haven’t had a good night’s sleep because I keep waking up with the fear of a man’s presence in my room. It pains me to think about what more could have happened to them, to any of us. Of course, there are bad elements in society, against which we can try to be cautious on a personal level, but their normalisation should be intolerable.”

A complaint regarding student safety was brought to the college administration’s attention. However, as the reported incidents had all occurred a few feet outside the college campus, the authorities concerned had voiced that they had no agency to involve themselves in the situation. This led to the student body questioning the accountability of their institution. Students had approached the Pink Booth outside Miranda House seeking protection and justice. Unfortunately, personnel informed them that the booth only dealt with cases of theft or snatching. They were directed to the local police station to report any instance of harassment. The Pink Booth is supposedly meant to act as a safe space for women. First-year DSJ student Ananya Chaturvedi says that the Pink Booth succeeded in branding safety, but not in providing it. “A pink-painted booth alone does not empower women. It serves no purpose if its commitment to safety ends at aesthetics,” she says.

Parents are left worrying for the security of their children as such instances continue to occur time after time. The father of one of the victims stated, “Very concerned about the safety of my daughter as well as other female students travelling to DU North Campus for their regular classes…When parents entrust these prestigious and reputed universities with their children, they do so in good faith. They deserve reassurance that this trust will be upheld.”

Image Credits: Apoorva

Written by: Anonymous

Keep Reading

News

The University of Delhi Stands With the Students of Gargi College

By Shivani Dadhwal February 13, 2020

In a recent press release, the University of Delhi (DU) released out a statement condemning the sexual harassment that occurred during Gargi College’s annual cultural fest, Reverie.

In a recent press release dated 12^th February 2020, the University of Delhi released an official statement condemning the sexual harassment that occurred during the college’s annual festival Reverie on 6^th February 2020 and standing with the female students and employees of Gargi College in their fight against the incident. In the statement signed by the University’s Registrar, Professor Tarun Kumar Das said, “The University strongly condemned the hooliganism, trespassing and any other incident that violated the modesty of the students, and appealed to the law enforcement agencies to take strong action against the culprits.”

In the statement, the University claims that it sought action taken report from the Principal of Gargi College as soon as it heard the news regarding the incident, with the University’s Proctor meeting with Police personnel and requesting them to deploy policemen at the gates of every college on 11^th February 2020. The Proctor also allegedly met with the Deputy Commissioner of the Police (North) and the Dean Students Welfare and Presiding Officer (ICC) of the University on 12^th February 2020 at 3 pm to discuss the measures that were to be taken regarding the matter immediately.

The University insists that it is doing everything to harbour a sense of safety amongst students and ensure safe and secure academic campuses for the university and is at a constant vigil for the same. The University had also issued an advisory for all colleges and institutions associated with DU concerning the safety and security of its female students and employees on 10^th December 2019 and had constituted a Committee on Women Safety and Security to strengthen the safety and security of female students and employees on 15^th January 2020.

“The University reiterates its resolve time continue to work towards ensuring a safe and secure college life for female students in particular. The University appeals to all to take all necessary steps to ensure the safety and security of our female students and employees and respect their dignity,” the press release stated.

Students of Gargi College, University of Delhi, experiences hooliganism, trespassing, and sexual harassment during their annual festival Reverie that took place on 6^th February 2020, due to poor administration and lack of proper security. Students of Gargi College have been observing dissent demonstrations against the act, and the College and established a Fact-Finding committee to find evidence and information for reporting it to official personnel. Student and teacher organisations of the university- Delhi University Teachers’ Association (DUTA), Delhi University Students’ Union (DUSU), Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthu Parishad (ABVP), National Students’ Union of India (NSUI)- have condemned the incident and held demonstrations across the campus in support of the female students and employees of Gargi College.

Feature Image Credits: Sanyukta Singh

Shreya Juyal

[email protected]

Keep Reading

DUB Speak

Free Metro for Women- The Other Side Of This Debate

By Shivani Dadhwal November 14, 2019

TW: Rape

Many questions have arisen regarding the free metro and bus rides for women proposed by the Delhi Government. Read further to know more about another side of this coin.

About 5 months ago, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) Government proposed a scheme providing free metro and bus ride for women in Delhi. On 26^th August, Delhi’s Deputy Chief Minister, Manish Sisodia presented a grant of Rs 290 crore in the Legislative Assembly during the monsoon session for this ‘free ride’ schemes. Out of Rs 290 crore, Rs 140 crores was allocated for DTC, and cluster buses and Rs 150 crore for Delhi metro.

“Public transport is considered the safest for women and keeping that in mind, the Government had decided that all buses and the metro rides will be made free for women,” Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, said. He also added that those who are willing to pay for the tickets would be free to do so. There are many women who can afford these transports and must refrain from taking the subsidy. This is to ensure that those who genuinely require this scheme may best benefit from it.

However, both men and women have questioned the true intentions behind this scheme. Though the scheme may sound appealing to many women, it does bring about the debate on gender equality and the question as to where to draw the line. “With all due respect, women in Delhi didn’t ask for a free pass to ride when they voted for Kejriwal Ji, they had voted for the safe environment promised to them,” Priyanka Chaturvedi, a National Spokesperson, wrote on Twitter.

She further argued in another tweet saying, “Hate to remind this, but Nirbhaya was gang-raped in a bus in Delhi. At that time the country didn’t protest over free rides for the women but for making the capital safe for its women to be able to take a bus or metro at any time of the day. Get your priorities right!”

“What is worse, once concession is given to one section of commuters, immediate demands will arise from more deserving sections, such as students, the handicapped, and senior citizens. The disease will spread fast to all other metros in the country, making them dependent on state governments for subsidies,” E. Sreedhan, more commonly known as Metro Man, wrote in a letter to PM Narendra Modi, requesting not to agree to the proposal as it would set “an alarming precedence”.

“The argument of the Delhi government—that it will reimburse the revenue losses to the DMRC—is a poor solace. The amount involved is about Rs. 1,000 crore per annum today. This will go on increasing as the metro network expands and with further fare hikes,” Sreedharan added.

The scheme also faced a whole lot of criticism regarding issues like overcrowding and a probable drop in the quality of services due to the erosion of DMRC funds. Instead of cutting water and power bills, Kejriwal proposed free metro to women, out of whom may well be able to afford the already-cheap mode of transport. Instead of improving security infrastructure and uplifting women’s safety, the government appears to be offering unnecessary expenses to be added to the State List.

Despite the probable “good” intentions of the Delhi Government, free metro and bus rides for women doesn’t seem to be the most viable proposal in theory or in action.

Feature Image Credits: Hitesh Kalra for DU Beat

Aditi Gutgutia

[email protected]

Keep Reading

News

No ‘Odd-Even’ Scheme, Delhi Government Withdraws Plans Even After Approval From NGT

By DU Beat November 11, 2017

The Delhi Government, on Saturday, has sanctioned to desist the ‘odd-even’ car rationing scheme in light of the NGT poser regarding the rationale behind the decision. The policy was earlier announced for November 13 to 17 with the intent of depurating the smog-filled air in the city. A crisis situation emerged when the levels of particulate matter (PM) 2.5 and PM 10 entered the severe category. The government declared that schools must be shut down and the people were suggested to wear N95 masks as protection against toxic Delhi smog.

While stubble burning in neighbouring states and fire-crackers have been traced as the primary contributor to the dangerous levels of air pollution in the city, yet they are not the only contributor to the distress of Delhiites. Despite several warnings of worsening air quality before winter, the municipalities turned a blind eye to pollution caused by open burning of waste, and improper disposal of construction and demolition waste. This year, the East Delhi Municipal Corporation (EDMC) and the South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC) did not issue a single fine for open burning of waste. The North Delhi Municipal Corporation, meanwhile, fined only 10 people.

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) pulled up the Delhi government for failing to act for the entire year until the air quality deteriorated to the extreme levels. “You tell us what is the purpose of implementing Odd-Even again? It seems you just want to reduce vehicles from roads” the court said noting the long list of exceptions. The Central Pollution Control Board has told the Green Court that two-wheelers cause more pollution compared to four-wheelers. Questioning the end result of banning cars when millions of two-wheelers are left unregulated. The court said, “If you are removing 500 cars from roads and allowing 1,000 two-wheelers, what purpose will it serve?” The court further remarked that the exemption from the Odd-Even scheme will be granted only to the CNG vehicle and emergency services such as ambulance and fire service while, earlier, this exemption pertained to women, two-wheelers and VVIPs.
Responsively, the Delhi Transport Minister Kailash Gahlot stated that ‘the Delhi Government could not compromise on the safety of women.’ He also accepted the fact that Delhi Government did not have enough public transport alternatives to accommodate over 60 lakh two-wheeler riders.’ Though the scheme has been called off, for now, the government may appeal for a review in the Green Court on Monday, to allow the car rationing policy with the previously practised exemptions.

Recently, the Delhi government’s had also decided to allow free travel for commuters in all DTC and cluster buses between November 13 and November 17, when the odd-even scheme was proposed to be implemented. This was done in order to encourage the use of public transport. It is unclear, now, whether such a decision will be implemented even after the suspension of the odd-even policy.

Experts, however, said there was a need for a long-term plan to reduce emissions. The Environment Pollution (Prevention & Control) Authority (EPCA) has issued a ‘Comprehensive Action Plan for Air Pollution Control in Delhi & NCR’ that enlists a combination of short, medium and long-term action for each source of pollution and indicates agencies responsible for implementation. A member of the EPCA and the director-general of the Centre for Science and Environment, Sunita Narain, said if the long-term measures already identified and suggested by the EPCA are not implemented, “air quality cannot improve”.

Image Credits: Hindustan Times

Varoon Tuteja

[email protected]

Keep Reading