RPF Proceeds Against 19 at Varanasi Cantt Under Jan Vishwas Act

By Harsh Mehra6 min read
Photorealistic empty railway station circulating area with wet asphalt and a station canopy, no people, no logos and no readable boards
Illustrative image: Empty station circulating-area motif after RPF proceeded against 19 people at Varanasi Cantt under the Jan Vishwas Act.

RPF Inspector Sandeep Kumar Yadav said 19 people were proceeded against under the Jan Vishwas Act at Varanasi Cantt railway station. Fourteen drivers were penalised for parking in the no-parking zone in the Cantt station precinct. Two vendors were proceeded against for unauthorised food sale. Fourteen and two are the itemised counts. The remaining three of the 19 were not itemised in that briefing.

That is the arithmetic. Fourteen plus two is sixteen. The inspector’s total is nineteen. Three people sit in the gap. The briefing did not name their offence. This copy does not invent it.

Varanasi Cantt is the station. The no-parking zone is in the station precinct. That is the geography Inspector Yadav used. A circulating-area map with bay numbers was not attached. Platform numbers were not attached. The drivers are drivers; the vehicles were not typed. Cars, two-wheelers, tempos — none of those words is on the briefing, so none of them is here.

The two vendors were proceeded against for unauthorised food sale. Unauthorised is the charge as given. A menu was not published. A stall count beyond two was not published. Whether the sale was on the circulating area, a foot overbridge, or a platform edge was not stated. The inspector named the offence. He did not name the pitch.

The Jan Vishwas Act is the statute under which the 19 were proceeded against. It is the legal frame Inspector Yadav put on the action. He did not, in this briefing, read out section numbers or a fine schedule. No fine amount is on this copy because none was given. No court date is on this copy because none was given.

Penalised, for the 14 drivers, is the verb the inspector used on the parking cases. Proceeded against, for the two vendors and for the 19 as a whole, is the other verb. The two are not being rewritten as arrests. They are not being rewritten as a magistrate’s list. They are the RPF’s own words for what was done at Cantt.

Nineteen is a small civic-rail figure. It is still a named-officer figure. Inspector Sandeep Kumar Yadav is the officer on the record. The precinct is Cantt, not another Varanasi station. A parking case at a different yard, or a vendor case at a different halt, is not folded into his 19.

What he itemised is 14 no-parking drivers and two unauthorised food vendors. Fine amounts, vehicle types and court dates remain unpublished because they were unpublished. The other three of the 19 remain unnamed as to offence because the inspector left them unnamed.

Fourteen parking cases and two food-sale cases are the itemised half of Cantt’s Jan Vishwas count. The other three of his 19 stay unnamed because he left them unnamed.

Sources and reporting

RPF Inspector Sandeep Kumar Yadav’s account of proceedings at Varanasi Cantt railway station under the Jan Vishwas Act (14 no-parking, 2 unauthorised food vendors; 19 in all).

Related Stories