Sudhanshu Mani, the visionary behind India’s Vande Bharat Express, spoke to The New Bengal Gazette editors Syed Abubakr and Sumit Singh on the Union Budget 2025 and the share allocated to the Indian Railways. With a career spanning over 4 decades in the Indian Railways, Mani embarked on an ambitious mission to design and prepare the Vande Bharat Express prototype in a record-breaking 18 months. He is hailed as the father of Vande Bharat trains in India, leaving a profound impact on the country’s railway development.
Question: The Budget allocation for Indian Railways for FY 2025-26 stands at ₹2.65 lakh crore, the same as last year’s allocation. In your view, is this allocation sufficient given the scale of pending projects? There has also been particular focus on safety, and the government also aims to complete the electrification of railways by the end of this financial year. However, do you think there are areas which should have received more attention under the budget allocated for Railways itself?
Answer: The infrastructure has been well taken care of, for the last decade or so. But since 2023, the Capex has not been increased substantially. It is about in the same range and now it is mainly given from budgetary support and not borrowings because interest burden of railways has also mounted and borrowing is not really a very viable proposition. The government is providing all the money, nothing is coming from railway surplus because railways does not make any.
Whether it is sufficient or not is not the question. Question is, whatever money is being given, is it being spent for the right purposes? What it is missing is the greater stress on safety, specifically Kavach. It’s not a question of money. Money is available. Execution of the project is very slow. Perhaps, they tend to allot as much of the money railways have been spending on or are able to spend. I think that upgrading the track should get more focus, and it may need more money. But execution is important, so they should gear up to spend this money carefully.
Station redevelopment is fine, but spending such large sums without a thought on how these edifices would be maintained is a problem. The operating ratio of the railway is actually over 100. It is artificially kept below 100 by reducing allotment for depreciation and even pension. So when expenses are exceeding the revenue, how do we propose to take care of these edifices under station redevelopment stations when they are all built in the Engineering, Procurement, and Construction (EPC) model. Nothing is being done in Public Private Partnership (PPP). So, it’s not a question of adequacy of the fund, but a question of whether funds are fruitfully utilised or not.
Question: Sir, you spoke about Kavach. So let’s address the elephant in the room, rail accidents in India. You argue that when it comes to rail accidents in India, government and opposition both have got it wrong. Why do you think it still happens?
Answer: The government decided to go for Kavach 3 years back. It’s their decision. It’s not mine or yours. So, apparently, they have confidence in the system. Some people may say it’s not a mature technology and so on but one assumes that IR knows. If they say it’s matured, we will take it as matured. But if it is matured, then why is it not being proliferated? Why have we not added a single kilometre in the last few years? The government has to tell the public why Kavach is not being rolled out. And if it is not matured, then why did the government decide to go along with Kavach.
And when it comes to artificial intelligence, one has been hearing that now it’s not a question of comparing data on the level of accidents today and what they were earlier. Today, rail accidents are definitely much lower. Fatalities data has also gone down. These have happened because of certain measures over the decades, not years, like unmanned level crossings have been eliminated, and more and more LHB coaches have been deployed. And tracks have been upgraded, and there were other improvements also.
So, the accidents have come down. But that doesn’t mean it can’t go down further. One of the proposals apart from Kavach, which will eliminate some accidents, not all, is use of AI to collate all the digital data that railways have at stations and in all the trains and generate near miss alerts. They will have to define what is a near miss. What a near miss is which almost caused a fatal or serious accident.
And I’m sure that for every accident that happens, there are more than 100, maybe 1,000 near misses. Manually, it can’t be found. AI should help generate that data every day. It should get attention at the highest level, and that will bring in a culture of safety and help towards movement to near zero accident ratio.
Question: There is also the European Train Control System (ETCS). Do you think it is a better alternative to Kavach in terms of preventing rail accidents? And if it is, then why is the government not adopting that?
Answer: Whether it is better or not can be debated. It is certainly not inferior. Kavach is almost equivalent to ETCS Level 2. Let’s put it like that. ETCS 2 has a complete radio communication coverage, whereas Kavach has up to, I think, 3 kilometres from the tower in one station. But that is enough to implement what is called a distant to go signaling system, which both of them follow. To that extent, to my mind, Kavach theoretically is almost an equivalent of ETCS level 2. But the question is ETCS level 2 is also four to five times more expensive. Keeping all this in mind, the government decided not to go for ETCS level 2, but to Kavach. That decision, I assume, the government has taken after due analysis. And that’s the ground to raise the question that if you have taken the decision, then why is Kavach implementation not progressing.
Question: 200 Vande Bharat trains, 50 Namo Bharat trains and 100 Amrit Bharat trains have been announced by the government. On one hand, we are pushing for modernization in terms of launching more Vande Bharat trains or for that matter high-speed rails, but on the other, many citizens still can’t afford to travel on these. They still rely on non-AC sleeper coaches and general coaches for travel. How should the Railways balance between modernization with affordability for common passengers?
Answer: Modernization has nothing to do with trains being AC or non-AC. It’s a question of manufacturing. AC is not a measure of modernisation. I have always believed that as India moves towards becoming a developed nation, all trains should have AC coaches, with one or two non-AC coaches reserved for those who cannot travel in AC due to medical or other reasons.
Additionally, each major route should have one or two migrant special trains with non-AC coaches, ensuring that everyone can afford a seat—perhaps cramped, but allowing them to travel with dignity, unlike the current scenario where many are forced to stand in overcrowded trains, even spilling into toilets.
As for fully AC trains, the common man cannot afford AC III-tier fares so go beyond the Garib Rath model, which already offers lower fares. This is not just about affordability—it is about restoring dignity and providing basic comfort, both of which are sorely lacking today.
As for the loss of revenue, try to make up as much as possible through higher fares and better services in high-end trains. Go for private participation for such trains, improve your services. People are willing to pay more. Earn more money there, and use it for the betterment of common people. You can do both, look after the common people, as well as, make more and more trains with amenities where people are willing to pay more. Once IR is spending lakhs of crores on infra, subsidising the travel for common man is not an impossibility.
Question: You argue that Indian railways’ skillful media orchestration has changed public perception. You also say that a fare hike would be “politically disastrous”. But trains like Vande Bharat have been unaffordable for many sections of the society. How does that resonate with the Indian voters? Does it not have any political consequences? Or like you said- the perception game has been well managed?
Answer: It’s not a question of whether Vande Bharat is unaffordable to somebody or not. Vande Bharat is a train which should be encouraged for people who can pay and run it only on sections where people can patronise it. Today, out of 70 old Vande Bharat trains, around 25 have poor occupancy. We should not fall into that trap. Railways are not that rich to afford that.
Run Vande Bharat trains where you are sure of good occupancy, and it’s not so difficult to determine. Also, just because we run Vande Bharat trains with good occupancy does not mean that we should not look after people who cannot afford to travel in such trains. Look after them also. That’s what I said. You are spending so much money on Capex. Take out some for revenue as well. You are not earning enough to do that. Go for a subsidy regime, a regime where railways are not bearing that burden but federal, state and city governments are.. You have to look after passengers who are willing to pay and who are willing to take trains instead of a plane.
Question: Especially in times of festivities, we often see visuals of railways with overcrowded coaches. What do you think should be done by the Indian railways to reduce that scenario?
Answer: That’s not a very easy problem to solve. There is a problem. One thing I can say is that they should learn from China- that people won’t like- but the whole of China starts moving in this Chinese New Year month. It’s not as if they have a multiplicity of festivals. The entire country almost goes into a shutdown. How do they manage it?
The solution obviously lies in running more and more trains. Nothing else. That government has done so, but it obviously hasn’t taken care of the burden. Run all 24-coach trains. Do not run shorter trains. Run destination to destination so that rail goes fast and does not have to stop mid way to too many places. There are many solutions which can be thought of. The government has done something but apparently, it’s not enough as we have seen. So more focus is definitely required in that area.
Question: Freight loading has been recorded at 1,588 million tonnes in FY 2023-24. You argue that freight performance is underwhelming. Why do you think so?
Answer: Freight loading is growing at two and a half percent, whereas the economy is growing at six and a half percent. So it is abysmal. It should grow at 10 percent. When the economy grows at x, transport grows at 2x to 3x at times, and railways should also be growing at that rate, perhaps higher if we have to increase our modal share. So our freight performance is very poor at two and a half percent, and the media can call it ridiculously an all-time high or whatever, but it’s very poor.
