Uber, Ola, Rapido get Delhi High Court notice over safety of women passengers. Published: 5:00 PM, Sep 30, 2026 Updated: 5:01 PM, Sep 30, 2026 During the hearing, counsel for petitioner Aditya Sehgal told the court that app-based ride-hailing companies operate more than two lakh cabs in the Delhi-NCR region. The counsel alleged that adequate checks on drivers are not carried out during night hours, particularly after 8 pm or 9 pm, including at airports and other strategic locations. The PIL seeks directions to ensure that the driver and vehicle operating a ride match the details shown on the app. ChatGPT generated/Representative Image The Delhi High Court on Wednesday, September 30, issued notices to ride-hailing companies Uber, Ola and Rapido, along with the Centre and the Delhi government, in a Public Interest Litigation seeking stronger safety measures for women using app-based cab and ride-hailing services. A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia asked the concerned parties to submit their responses and scheduled the matter for further hearing on December 16. The court said it wanted to make private operators of taxi applications accountable for the safety mechanisms provided to passengers. "We want to make the private operators of the taxi apps accountable. That is the reason we are issuing notices," the bench observed.

Rapido files insolvency plea against Magicpin over unpaid operational dues. Rapido has filed an insolvency petition against Magicpin at the NCLT over alleged unpaid operational dues of less than ₹10 crore. Rapido takes Magicpin to NCLT over unpaid dues (Photos: X/@rapidoapp_, mymagicpin) Mobility platform Rapido has filed an insolvency petition at the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) against hyperlocal e-commerce platform Magicpin. Consequently, the Chandigarh Bench of the NCLT issued a notice to Magicpin, asking the company to file its response. The dispute centres on operational dues claimed by Rapido. However, the tribunal has not yet admitted the insolvency petition or determined the merits of the claim. Magicpin's response and the subsequent hearing will be important in establishing how the matter proceeds. Rapido and Magicpin had earlier partnered to expand Rapido's food delivery business, Ownly, with Magicpin providing access to its nationwide network of more than 80,000 restaurants. The partnership aimed to help Ownly scale beyond Bengaluru, while Magicpin was to leverage Rapido's delivery fleet in select locations. Notably, Magicpin has also previously powered food delivery for platforms including Paytm and PhonePe. People aware of the matter said the amount involved is less than ₹10 crore and relates, among other things, to the reconciliation of payments as well as costs incurred by Rapido for deliveries and logistics. Rapido, registered as Roppen Transportation Services Private Limited, has filed the petition under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, which allows an operational creditor to seek the initiation of a corporate insolvency resolution process in relation to an alleged default. According to the case details provided, the tribunal issued its initial notice on August 4. At the subsequent hearing on August 25, the legal counsel representing Magicpin sought additional time to submit its response. The two-member Bench, comprising K.K. Singh, Member (Technical), and Ashok Kumar Bhardwaj, Member (Judicial), granted Magicpin one week to file its response. The tribunal also directed that any rejoinder be filed before the next hearing, which is scheduled for October 5, 2026. Rapido was represented at the August 25 hearing by advocates Gulshan Kr. Sachdev, Jatin Arora and Ishaan Goel. Magicpin was represented by advocates Prachi Johri, Monika Shahi, Sachin Jain and Himanshu Sharma.

Rapido under scrutiny for demanding additional fare and pre-ride tips from users; CCPA imposes fine for using "dark practices" Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) - India's consumer watchdog - found bike-taxi aggregator Rapido guilty of using deceptive prompts, a manipulative fare slider, and pre-ride tipping requests to prompt users into paying beyond the originally quoted fare, violating dark pattern regulations. CCPA has fined Rapido Rs 10 lakh for using dark patterns like "confirm shaming" and misleading fare prompts to pressure users into paying more for rides Published on: Sep 16, 2026, 00:30 Updated on: Sep 16, 2026, 00:30 Follow NewsGram WhatsApp Channel Key Points The Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) fined Rapido's parent company, Roppen Transportation Services, for using deceptive practices that pressured users into paying more than the initially quoted fare. CCPA classified Rapido's fare-increase prompts as "confirm shaming" and its price slider design as "interface interference," both violations under India's 2023 dark pattern guidelines. CCPA said tips should only be requested after a ride is completed, rejecting Rapido's defense that its tipping prompts were voluntary and mirrored real-world fare negotiation. BIKE-TAXI AGGREGATOR RAPIDO has been fined Rs 10 lakhs for deceiving customers with fraudulent practices and prompting them to pay more for rides. In an order issued on August 31, 2026, the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) - India's premier regulatory body for consumer rights protection - imposed a penalty on the service platform and found it guilty of indulging in misleading advertisements, unfair trade practices, unfair contracts, and the use of covert practices to prompt riders to pay more before their rides were confirmed. Users complain Rapido's pre-ride tipping and excess pricing during rush hours practices. The CCPA fined Rapido's parent company, Roppen Transportation Services Private Limited. The consumer watchdog body undertook a wide-scale assessment of ride hailing platforms and aggregates operating in India - including Rapido, Ola, and Uber - focusing on dynamic pricing and pre-ride tipping practices. The evaluation was prompted by a complaint filed by a user on May 16, 2026. In the complaint, the user stated that Rapido had introduced a feature prompting users to pay a "tip" to the driver before confirmation of the ride to increase their chances of getting a ride faster. The complainant further alleged the bike taxi aggregator levied excessive pricing during peak hours. During its assessment of Rapido, the CCPA found that the ride hailing platform incited users into paying more to increase their chances of getting a ride. The Rapido application works in a specific way, which begins with it quoting a fare for the requested ride. However, after some time with no rider accepting the request, the application displays a message for the user to add 'additional fare.' "Higher the price, higher the chance of getting a ride"; "Captains aren't accepting at Rs 60. Try adding +10, +20, +30," are some of the prompts seen on the app's interface asking for additional fare. CCPA argues that such a practice deceives the users into believing that their chances of getting a confirmed ride is directly dependent upon the amount of additional fare they give. They argued that once a user has committed to booking a ride, it leaves limited scope for negotiation. The 'no-so-covert' Rapido prompts that ask for additional fares could create a sense of urgency and fear of losing the ride if the consumer declined to pay more, the CCPA further remarked. The consumer protection body has deemed this practice to be an instance of "Confirm Shaming" - identified under the Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023. According to the CCPA, asking consumers to pay an additional amount after they had already accepted the initially displayed fare could create psychological pressure. The authority said this was especially important because the rider had already reached the booking stage and was depending on the platform to arrange a ride. A message indicating that the likelihood of getting a ride was lower without paying extra could consequently encourage the consumer to spend more. The Consumer Protection Authority also reviewed Rapido's 'Set your price' feature and questioned the manner in which its fare options were displayed. Rapido's app interface allows users to suggest a custom fare amount while requesting a ride. Users can decide upon the custom price by using a "price slider" and setting it upon the desired price. CCPA observed that the slider used different colors to show options for raising or lowering the fare. When users increased the amount, a green message reading 'higher chance of getting a ride' appeared. However, attempts to reduce the fare triggered a red or orange warning. The consumer protection body further pointed out that the slider provided more room for increasing the fare than for lowering it. The authority categorized the design as 'Interface Interference', another type of dark pattern, stating that the interface could influence consumers into selecting a higher fare. CCPA questions Rapido asking for tips before ride starts. The CCPA also questioned the policy of Rapido asking for a tip even before the ride had even started. The body stated that the fare quoted at the time of the trip's booking already takes into consideration various deciding factors such as distance, time, traffic, tolls, and the amount payable to the driver. CCPA commented that it found no justification for asking a user to pay an additional amount for the same ride before the service had begun. In its defense, Rapido's parent company argued tipping wasn't a mandatory requirement after a ride has been accepted and is completely voluntary A tip is a voluntary amount that a user pays to a service provider based upon the quality of the service received, the consumer protection body observed. Citing the Motor Vehicle Aggregator Guidelines, 2025, the CCPA stated that tips should not be presented as a condition for providing the service or as a payment necessary to obtain a ride, and should only be given after the completion of the service. Rapido's Defense and CCPA's Action. In its defense, Rapido's parent company argued tipping wasn't a mandatory requirement after a ride has been accepted and is completely voluntary. It also says that its matching algorithm that connects users with riders continues functioning regardless if a tip is received. The bike-taxi aggregator further argued that the prompts its app displays asking for additional amounts mimics the real-price haggling that takes place between riders and users. The CCPA, however, rejected Rapido's submissions on tipping. As of now, the CCPA has provided Rapido a timeframe of 15 days from the date of the issue of the notice to submit a compliance report. (Edited by Agniva Ray) Suggested reading: