Not All Bike Taxis Are Unsafe: Why Some Platforms Are Built Differently

As Maharashtra tightens scrutiny on bike taxi operations, safety concerns have taken centre stage, particularly around petrol-powered (ICE) two-wheelers. While the government’s intent to protect commuters is understandable, the current debate risks oversimplifying a far more nuanced reality. Treating all bike taxis as inherently unsafe ignores a crucial distinction: the difference between informal operators and structured, regulated platforms.

Bike taxis have become an integral part of Mumbai’s last-mile mobility ecosystem. They offer quick, affordable connectivity in areas where autos are scarce and public transport is overcrowded. However, safety failures in urban mobility rarely stem from the vehicle itself. They stem from how the service is designed, monitored, and enforced.

This is where platforms like Rapido differ from the informal bike taxi economy that still operates across many parts of the city. Unlike street-hailed or loosely coordinated services, Rapido follows a structured onboarding process for its riders, known as Captains. Before being allowed on the platform, Captains undergo Aadhaar-based identity verification, police background checks, physical address validation, and vehicle document scrutiny. This immediately addresses one of the biggest safety gaps in informal operations—anonymity.

But safety doesn’t stop at verification. Rapido treats safety as an operational discipline rather than a set of advisory guidelines. Every Captain must complete mandatory in-app training modules before taking their first ride. These cover professional behaviour, emergency response protocols, and standards for interacting respectfully with passengers, including women commuters. Completion of these modules is compulsory; failure to comply results in the Captain being unable to operate on the platform.

During the ride itself, accountability is built into the system. Every trip is digitally booked and GPS-tracked end to end. Riders can see Captain details before the journey begins, share live trip links with trusted contacts, and access an in-app SOS button connected to a dedicated safety response team. These features are particularly significant for women passengers, for whom predictability and traceability often define whether a commute feels safe.

Post-ride systems are equally critical. Feedback is actively sought after each trip, allowing even minor discomfort to be flagged. Rapido operates a strict zero-tolerance policy for verified safety violations. Any confirmed complaint of harassment, violence, or serious misconduct results in the immediate deactivation of the Captain. There is no informal warning system or quiet reactivation; safety breaches are treated as non-negotiable.

This approach highlights why blanket judgments can be counterproductive. When all bike taxis are viewed through the lens of isolated incidents, platforms that have invested heavily in safety governance are penalised alongside unregulated operators. The result is not safer mobility, but reduced availability of structured services—often pushing commuters back toward informal options with even fewer safeguards.

For policymakers, the challenge is not simply to regulate by fuel type, but to recognise system-led safety standards. Differentiated governance based on verification, training, traceability, and enforcement can protect commuters while preserving livelihoods and access.

As Mumbai debates the future of bike taxis, one thing is clear: safety is not a function of speed or engine alone. It is a function of systems. And not all bike taxis are built the same.