Bengaluru Metro fares rise to ninety double Delhi commuter cost
Bengaluru’s Namma Metro, once hailed as a crucial step towards reducing the city’s reliance on private vehicles, is now drawing sharp criticism after its fares were hiked to nearly double those charged in Delhi. The maximum ticket price was increased from ₹60 to ₹90 overnight, making it the costliest metro system in the country and triggering a storm of protest among daily commuters.
The sudden escalation has reignited debate over the affordability of urban transport in one of India’s most congested cities. While Delhi Metro continues to cap fares at ₹60, Mumbai at ₹50 and Kolkata at ₹30, Bengaluru commuters now face the highest burden despite services being largely comparable across cities in terms of coaches, infrastructure and passenger handling capacity.
Transport experts argue that the fare hike risks undermining the very purpose of mass rapid transit: offering an affordable, sustainable alternative to road congestion and rising emissions. For many daily passengers travelling more than 25 kilometres, the increase translates into significant monthly costs that could push them back towards two-wheelers and private cars, a move at odds with Bengaluru’s environmental goals.
Officials from the Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited (BMRCL) defended the revision, citing rising operational costs since 2017, including electricity charges, staff salaries and maintenance expenditure. They have also signalled the possibility of annual increases of up to 5 per cent to keep the project financially viable. Analysts, however, point out that ridership has steadily climbed in recent years, boosting revenues, and question whether such steep hikes are necessary when higher passenger numbers already contribute to cost recovery.
Economists warn that the hike could disproportionately impact lower and middle-income groups who form a significant portion of the metro’s user base. In a city battling worsening air quality and traffic gridlock, critics see the move as counterproductive, arguing that mass transit should be incentivised rather than made prohibitive. Many urban planners believe metro systems should be viewed as essential public infrastructure, not merely commercial ventures, especially when governments are promoting zero-carbon and sustainable urban growth.
The backlash has also sparked a wider conversation about the role of equitable pricing in shaping urban mobility. Civic voices argue that if public transport becomes too expensive, Bengaluru risks eroding the social and environmental benefits metros were designed to achieve. The metro, they note, was envisioned as a long-term solution to reduce dependency on private vehicles and create cleaner, healthier cities.
As Bengaluru adjusts to the new fares, the debate continues over whether short-term financial sustainability should outweigh long-term societal benefits. For now, the steep fare structure may keep the metro running in balance sheets, but at the cost of alienating the very citizens it was built to serve.
