About time amusement parks are brought under scrutiny

Pushpa Girimaji

I read this horrifying account of a young woman dying in a go-kart accident at an amusement park in Pinjore. Isn’t an amusement park supposed to ensure that such accidents do not happen? Can the victim’s family hold the park management accountable in this case?

At the time of writing, all I have seen is a preliminary report in the media and I will comment on the basis of that. According to the report, the young woman had tied her hair in a bun and while she was going on the go-kart, her hair flew out of the bun and got stuck in the rear wheel, resulting in her scalp getting ripped off. It is truly the most horrifying and tragic incident.

Someone who is taking such a ride will not be aware of the inherent dangers and it is the responsibility of the amusement parks to ensure that the visitors are safe. For example, they should not be wearing any loose clothes like a duppatta that may get stuck in the wheel. If the rider has long hair, it should be properly tied and tucked tightly inside the helmet so that it does not come off. And the helmet should fit properly and should be tied securely. The riders should also be made aware of the precautions that need to be taken. Did the amusement park take these steps? Failure to do so constitutes negligence for which the amusement park has to be held liable. The reports say that the 28-year-old woman was wearing a helmet. In that case, how did the hair come out? Investigations should bring out all the facts.

Having said that I must underscore that amusement parks have high-speed rides that thrill, but can also kill, unless all precautions are taken to ensure the safety of the riders. The government also has a responsibility in regulating these parks. In the United States, despite strong safety regulations, the Consumer Product Safety Commission estimated that, in 2016, as many as 30,900 received treatment at hospital emergency departments for amusement-park related injuries. We do not have any statistical data on such injuries in India, but such incidents are being reported in the media at regular intervals, calling for stringent regulation of amusement parks to ensure their safety.

Have consumer courts dealt with such incidents?

I recall the earliest case decided by the apex consumer court way back in 2008, where it upheld compensation of Rs 1 lakh awarded by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission to a family of four, who were injured in an accident involving a merry-go-round at Phulwari Children’s Bazaar in Karnal in 1996.

On that fateful day in November, RM Kaushik got on to the ride along with his family. Soon after, the swing suddenly gained sharp momentum and the seat on which the family was sitting got detached from the fulcrum, hurling them at great speed to a distance of about 15 yards. They fell on to the hard ground below. Fortunately, all the four escaped with injuries. The State Commission held not only the owner and the operator of the merry-go-round, but also the organisers of the mela, the Haryana Institute of Fine Arts and its director, liable. While dismissing the appeal of the institute and its director, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission pointed out that they had failed in their duty to take due care in ensuring that the rides were safe in all respects.

Similarly in Vadodara Municipal Corporation vs Purshottam V Murjani case, the apex court dismissed the contention of the corporation that only the company — Ripple Aqua Sports — that was contracted to ply the boats for joy rides was liable to pay compensation. It held that the Corporation, which was managing the Sursagar Lake, was equally liable. This was subsequently upheld by the Supreme Court in 2014, where it reiterated: “Where activity of a public body is hazardous, highest degree of care is expected and breach of such duty is actionable. This obligation is also referable to Article 21.” (CA No 3630 of 2010)

Twenty two people had died in this 1993 boat tragedy, which was caused on account of overloading. While the State Commission awarded a compensation ranging from Rs 50,000 to Rs 10,76,000, the National Commission had enhanced the quantum of damages in some of the cases, keeping in mind the principles set under the Motor Vehicles Act.