Booking a train ticket online should be simple: choose a train, select a seat, pay and get your ticket. But for many IRCTC users, the journey does not always go that smoothly. A new consumer survey suggests that passengers are often dealing with design practices that can push, interrupt or confuse them while booking or cancelling tickets.
A LocalCircles survey of more than 90,000 IRCTC users across 324 districts has identified six types of dark patterns on the IRCTC website and app. These include forced action, nagging, basket sneaking, drip pricing, interface interference and bait and switch.
Dark patterns are design features on websites and apps that can influence users into taking an action they may not otherwise have chosen.
They can range from repeatedly pushing a consumer to buy something to adding an extra service to the cart, hiding charges until later in the transaction or making it difficult to complete the action the user originally came for.
The Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) has identified 13 such dark patterns under its 2023 guidelines.
The survey mapped the responses from IRCTC users against these 13 categories and found six that were reported on the platform.
The most striking finding is that 70% of consumers reported experiencing forced action while booking or cancelling train tickets.
The survey asked users whether they had been logged out of IRCTC without an apparent reason while booking a ticket, making it difficult to complete the reservation.
Of the 19,425 people who answered this question, 42% said this happened very frequently, while 28% said it happened sometimes. Another 15% said it happened rarely.
In simple terms, a passenger could be in the middle of a time-sensitive booking and suddenly find themselves logged out, forcing them to start the process again.
The second most widely reported pattern was nagging, experienced by 46% of respondents.
This refers to repeated prompts or interruptions while a consumer is trying to complete a transaction.
The survey cites examples such as repeated requests to download the IRCTC app, share personal details, enable notifications or consider promotional offers.
For someone simply trying to book a train ticket, repeated interruptions can make an already stressful process even more frustrating.
Another concern is basket sneaking, reported by 45% of consumers.
This happens when additional products or services are automatically added during a transaction without the consumer explicitly choosing them.
According to the survey, examples reported by consumers included travel insurance, meals and an agreement to upgrade to an upper class.
The survey says 21% of respondents experienced this very frequently, 24% sometimes and 23% rarely.
This finding also raises an important question about consent. The report points to the RBI’s June 2026 direction for banks, under which add-on products must have a default consent setting of ‘No’. The same approach, it argues, could be applied to IRCTC so that paid add-ons remain unticked unless passengers actively select them.
Drip pricing was reported by 43% of consumers who booked or cancelled tickets through IRCTC.
This refers to charges that are not disclosed upfront but appear later in the transaction.
Of the 11,462 respondents to this question, 25% said they experienced such charges very frequently, 18% sometimes and 6% rarely.
For consumers, the problem is straightforward: the price they see at the beginning should give them a clear idea of what they will actually have to pay.
The survey also found that 38% of respondents experienced bait and switch.
This refers to situations where the ticket, train or seat booked was different from what the consumer had originally selected or requested.
Among 11,249 respondents, 19% said they experienced this very frequently, another 19% sometimes and 11% rarely.
For a railway passenger, this is particularly important because the choice of train, class and seat can directly affect their travel plans.
The sixth pattern identified was interface interference, reported by 31% of consumers.
This means that while a consumer is using the platform for one purpose, the interface interrupts the journey and presents another product or service for purchase.
The survey received 11,352 responses to this question. Of these, 20% said they experienced the pattern very frequently, 11% sometimes and 8% rarely.
The other seven categories, i.e., false urgency, confirm shaming, subscription trap, disguised advertisement, trick question, SaaS billing and rogue malware, were not marked in the survey. Importantly, the report says this does not mean those patterns do not exist on IRCTC; rather, the survey did not establish them, either because they were outside the questions asked or because responses did not warrant marking them.
The findings come shortly after IRCTC launched a revamped website on July 15, 2026.
According to the report, the new platform was designed to handle a much larger number of bookings and enquiries. It also introduced features such as a fare calendar, seat preference selection, a single screen showing different classes, Indian language support and a cleaner interface with fewer pop-ups and CAPTCHA interruptions.
But there is an important distinction here.
A faster website does not automatically mean a more consumer-friendly website.
Server capacity, crashes and loading times are performance issues. Dark patterns, on the other hand, relate to how the platform is designed and how choices are presented to consumers. The report argues that fixing one does not necessarily fix the other.
LocalCircles plans to submit its findings to the Ministry of Railways, IRCTC and the CCPA, along with a set of recommendations to make the ticket-booking process more transparent and consumer-friendly.
It has called for an independent third-party audit of the IRCTC website and app to identify and remove dark patterns. The report also recommends that travel insurance and all other paid add-ons should have a default consent setting of ‘No’, so that passengers actively choose them instead of having to opt out.
It has further suggested that IRCTC clearly display the full amount payable upfront, including convenience fees and any dynamic or flexi-fare components. Further, it has recommended ending advertising interstitials that interrupt the booking process and ensuring that passengers are not made to feel forced into taking an action or paying an unexpected charge.
The issue also raises a larger question about how dark patterns are regulated in India.
The CCPA has already taken action against several private platforms. According to the report, nine platforms, including Zepto, IndiGo, SpiceJet, BookMyShow, FirstCry, PharmEasy, McAfee and Physics Wallah, were penalised a cumulative amount of nearly Rs 20 lakh for practices such as drip pricing, basket sneaking and confirm shaming.
But consumer protection should not depend on whether a company is privately or publicly owned.
If the CCPA is examining private companies for dark patterns, it should also examine public sector undertakings and government-owned platforms with the same level of scrutiny.
IRCTC is 68% government-owned, according to the report, and its website and app are used by millions of railway passengers.
The fact that a platform is government-owned should arguably make consumer-friendly design more important, not less.
Simply put, the IRCTC findings are ultimately about more than a railway ticket.
As more government services move online, citizens increasingly depend on websites and apps to make payments, apply for services and access essential facilities. That makes transparency and ease of use particularly important.
A consumer should know what they are paying for, what they are agreeing to and why they are being asked to take an action.
The message is simple: whether a platform belongs to a private company or a government-owned entity, consumers should not have to fight their way through the interface to complete a basic transaction.