More than 375 Passangers placed on no‑fly list in five years
The skies over India’s burgeoning urban centers, once a symbol of progress and seamless connectivity, are now mirroring a different reality: a surge in disruptive passenger behaviour. With over 375 individuals placed on the national “No-Fly List” in the past five years, the aviation sector is grappling with a growing challenge. This escalation in misconduct, which peaked with 110 bans in 2023, underscores the urgent need for a societal shift towards greater personal responsibility and respect for shared spaces, a core tenet of our vision for equitable, sustainable cities. The incidents, often fuelled by alcohol and a disregard for crew instructions, are not just safety hazards but also a stark indicator of a broader cultural issue that demands attention.
The government’s data, recently disclosed in a parliamentary session, paints a vivid picture of this trend. While the pandemic-affected year of 2020 saw only 10 passengers barred from flying, the numbers have since climbed steadily, reaching a zenith in 2023. Officials attribute this surge to a confluence of factors, including the post-pandemic travel boom and a heightened awareness following several high-profile incidents. The Civil Aviation Requirements (CAR) serve as the regulatory backbone, categorising misconduct into three distinct levels, each with a corresponding ban duration. Level 1, for minor verbal abuse, can lead to a three-month ban, while Level 2, for physical altercations, carries a six-month grounding. The most severe, Level 3, which encompasses life-threatening behaviour, mandates a minimum two-year ban.
The process of placing a passenger on this list is rigorous. When an incident is reported, the airline forms an internal committee to review the evidence and determine the appropriate level of the offence. This internal mechanism, while efficient, has been a point of contention for some industry experts who advocate for more transparency. They suggest that while the list is a necessary tool for maintaining cabin discipline, the lack of public access to its contents and the specific details of cases makes it difficult for the public to fully grasp the gravity of the situation. This lack of transparency, they argue, could also hinder the development of a more robust appeals process for those who feel they have been wrongly accused.
In a world striving for equitable and sustainable urban environments, such incidents on a flight—a microcosm of our society—represent a significant regression. The aggression and entitlement often displayed by unruly passengers are antithetical to the principles of communal harmony and respect that are essential for building a truly civil society. These aren’t isolated events but symptoms of a larger societal issue. The aviation industry’s firm stance, therefore, is not merely about enforcing rules but about setting a precedent for acceptable public conduct. By holding individuals accountable, the sector is sending a powerful message that personal convenience and momentary lapses in judgement cannot be allowed to compromise the safety and well-being of others.
The challenge now lies in moving beyond punitive measures to preventive ones. Experts suggest a multi-pronged approach that includes stricter enforcement of alcohol policies at airports, better training for cabin crew in de-escalation techniques, and a public awareness campaign that highlights the importance of respectful and responsible travel. The goal is to foster a culture of mutual respect and civility, ensuring that our journeys—both on the ground and in the air—are safe, pleasant, and reflective of the kind of cities we aspire to build. The government’s firm hand is a good start, but sustained cultural change will be the true measure of success.
