A recent defence of delivery partners by Zomato CEO Deepinder Goyal has reignited debate over who is responsible for traffic violations on Indian roads. Goyal argued that delivery riders are often singled out because their uniforms make them more visible, while similar behaviour by other motorists goes largely unnoticed. He framed the issue as part of a wider problem: impatience among road users rather than deliberate law-breaking by delivery workers alone.
What the CEO said
Deepinder Goyal pushed back against blanket criticism of delivery partners when incidents of traffic violations surface. His point: when a rider in a branded uniform jumps a signal or squeezes through traffic, it is easy to spot and blame the company. The same manoeuvres by private motorists, he suggested, are common but get less attention because they lack that visual cue.
Visibility and perception
The argument centres on perception. Uniformed riders are highly visible on the streets, which makes them a convenient target for complaints and media attention. This visibility can create a distorted impression that delivery fleets are uniquely responsible for traffic problems, even if the underlying behaviour is similar across many types of road users.
Looking at the bigger picture: impatience on the road
Goyal broadened the conversation by pointing to a cultural and infrastructural issue: impatience on Indian roads. Congestion, poor infrastructure, tight delivery windows and a general tendency to prioritise speed over safety all contribute to risky behaviour. When the roads are crowded and time is tight, many drivers and riders alike make unsafe choices.
Systemic causes
- Traffic congestion: Heavy traffic increases pressure to save time, encouraging unsafe overtaking and signal-jumping.
- Delivery economics: Short delivery windows and pay-per-trip models can incentivise faster riding.
- Enforcement gaps: Inconsistent policing and selective enforcement allow risky behaviour to persist.
- Infrastructure shortfalls: Lack of segregated lanes and poor road design push riders into conflict with other vehicles.
Reactions and implications for policy and business
The comments raise important questions for regulators, platforms and the public. If delivery riders are being disproportionately blamed, solutions must avoid scapegoating and focus on root causes. At the same time, companies that rely on gig workers face reputational and legal risks if their fleets are repeatedly linked to traffic violations.
What stakeholders can do
- For platforms: Strengthen rider training, tweak incentives that encourage safe behaviour, and use telematics to monitor risky patterns.
- For regulators: Enforce rules consistently across all road users and explore infrastructure changes such as dedicated delivery lanes or safer pick-up/drop-off zones.
- For the public: Avoid blaming a single group and support broader road-safety campaigns that target all motorists.
Practical steps to improve road safety
A combination of policy, technology and cultural shifts can reduce violations and accidents. Practical measures include:
- Data-driven enforcement to identify hotspots and repeat offenders, regardless of vehicle type.
- Incentive designs that reward safe deliveries instead of only speed.
- Regular rider training and certification programs focused on defensive driving and traffic rules.
- Investment in infrastructure—bike lanes, proper sidewalks and organized loading/unloading zones.
- Public awareness campaigns that stress shared responsibility among all road users.
Finding a balanced approach
The debate highlights a need for balanced responses. Singling out delivery partners ignores the wider context of traffic behaviour and system pressures. At the same time, platforms must accept responsibility for the behaviour of workers who represent their brand on the road. Meaningful improvements will come from joint action: fair enforcement, smarter business practices, better infrastructure and a cultural push toward patience and safety on the road.