Uber rape: Indian woman withdraws US case
Washington: An Indian woman executive who sued Uber after allegedly being raped by a driver for the cab-hailing service in India has voluntarily withdrawn her lawsuit, a media report said citing a court filing.
The 26-year-old woman filed her lawsuit in January in the US, about a month after she was allegedly raped and assaulted on a Uber ride in Delhi.
The woman’s alleged attacker, Shiv Kumar Yadav, was quickly arrested and confessed to the crime a week later during interrogation, according to Delhi Police. He is currently awaiting trial in India.
Tuesday’s filing with the US District Court for the Northern District of California did not state whether there were any terms involved with the withdrawal, CNet.com reported.
Representatives for Uber and the alleged victim declined to comment.
The woman’s New York-based attorney Douglas Wigdor could not immediately be reached for comment.
In her original lawsuit, the alleged victim accusing the web-based US taxi firm of focusing on profit over the safety of its passengers, sought unspecified damages and for Uber to “overhaul” its safety measures.
The woman detailed 13 separate safety measures she believes the company should adopt, including requiring drivers to install “tamper-proof” video cameras in their cars that would trigger an alarm if disabled.
“Uber’s focus on its bottom line over the safety of its passengers has resulted in what can only be described as modern day electronic hitchhiking,” Wigdor said at that time.
“We hope that this lawsuit will bring about positive change that will ultimately protect people worldwide who are unaware of the serious risks of entering into an Uber car,” Wigdor added.
Uber CEO Travis Kalanick initially also called the crime “horrific” and said the company would do “everything to help bring this perpetrator to justice”.
But the company argued in April that the lawsuit should be dismissed because the company had no relationship with the defendant and because the lawsuit could not be brought in the US.
“While the plaintiff undoubtedly can state a claim against her alleged assailant, she cannot state a claim against Uber US, which is the wrong party,” Uber wrote in its motion, saying that Yadav was working for Uber BV, a Netherlands-based overseas operation.
“Nor does California law govern a dispute involving an alleged wrong committed by one Indian citizen against another Indian citizen, in India.”