|
|
 | | From: | surreal_ravi | | Subject: | Godhra an accident: High-level inquiry | | Date: | 17 Jan 2005 09:15:08 -0800 |
|
|
 | Godhra an accident: Banerjee report
HindustanTimes.com/Agencies
New Delhi, January 17, 2005|20:22 IST
The high-level inquiry into the blaze in a train in Godhra in which 59
persons were burnt to death that led to subsequent violence in Gujarat
in 2002 has found that it was an "accidental fire".
"It was not a deliberate attempt... and there is no evidence of any
conspiracy," the interim report said.
"With the elimination of the 'petrol theory', 'miscreant activity
theory' as well as the ruling out of any possibility of 'electrical
fire', the fire in S-6 coach of Sabarmati Express can at this stage be
ascribed as an 'accidental fire'," Justice UC Banerjee Committee,
appointed by Railway Minister Lalu Prasad, said in its report.
Retired Supreme Court judge UC Banerjee, the chairman of the panel set
up to investigate the incident, submitted the report to Railway Board
Chairman RK Singh.
Noting that there has been a preponderance of evidence that the fire
originated in the coach itself without any external input, the
committee "completely ruled out" the possibility of an inflammable
liquid having been used as there was a smell of burning first, followed
by dense smoke and flames thereafter.
"This sequence is not possible in case the fire is caused by
inflammable liquid thrown on the floor of the coach or an inflammable
object thrown from outside the coach," the two-part interim report
said.
The Committee headed by former Supreme Court Judge UC Banerjee was
constituted on September 4 last year following a Union Cabinet decision
to inquire into certain aspects of the incident of fire on the
Ahmedabad-bound Sabarmati Express at Godhra on February 27, 2002.
The initial term of the committee was for a period of three months and
was subsequently extended by another three months.
The Committee said that the 'inflammable liquid theory' also was
negated by the statement of some of the passengers, who suffered
injuries on the upper portion of the body and not the lower body, and
who crawled towards the door on elbows and could get out without much
injury.
Observing that the report could be "unpalatable for the Railways whose
entire approach seemed to be casual", Banerjee told reporters that
there had been a failure on the part of the Railways and the
Commissioner of Railway Safety to conduct a statutory inquiry into the
accident.
"This was in breach of the Railway Act as well as the Accident Manual
of the Zonal Railway," it said.
The report said that the Railway administration had also not made any
concerted effort to preserve clues of the incident.
In particular, the Committee criticised the onward travel to Ahmedabad
of S-7 coach despite some damage to it and despite it being a crucial
piece of evidence.
"In fact, the damaged portion of S-7 has been disposed of as scrap," it
said.
The entire hierarchy of Western Railway came in for severe criticism
for pre-judging the issue by describing the fire incident as a
"miscreant activity without conducting even a preliminary inquiry".
The Committee noted that neither the then Railway Minister nor members
of the Board visited the site of the accident or the injured
passengers.
The Committee said that on the basis of available evidence, it was
"unbelievable that 'Kar Sevaks' (to the extent of 90 per cent of total
occupants) armed with 'Trishuls', would allow to get themselves burnt
without a murmur by miscreant activity like a person entering S-6 coach
from outside and setting the coach on fire".
It noted the forensic laboratory's experiment and verified its
conclusion that it was "impossible to set fire to the train from
outside".
The Committee has received evidence of cooking inside the coach by Kar
Sevaks.
The Committee in its report said that "on the basis of evidence
available on record, it was found that the train left the platform at
around 7.48 am and stopped on account of vacuum failure in some coaches
and the train started again at about 08.00 am."
"Relying on the Survey of India Mapping of Distances and given the
speed of the train at that time, the Committee noted that the engine
ought to take about five minutes time to be near the post at 468/19 and
the Guard's coach at 468/45. It is at this juncture that the smoke was
not only noticed but had been reported to GRP, RPF and Vadodara
Control."
"There was, thus, no scope for any miscreant activity from any external
agency during this period," the report said.
|
|
| | From: | Torpedo | | Subject: | Re: Godhra an accident: High-level inquiry | | Date: | Tue, 18 Jan 2005 07:33:01 +1100 |
|
|
| Any interim report on this?
http://www.un.org/apps/sg/sgstats.asp?nid=1054
New York, 23 August 2004 - Statement attributable to the Spokesman for the
Secretary-General on Bangladesh bombing
The Secretary-General is appalled to learn that the bombing at a rally in
Dhaka on Saturday had caused the death reportedly of more than a dozen
people and injured a large number of others who had gathered there. He
strongly condemns the use of violence against the civilian population and
reiterates his call for the perpetrators of these acts to be brought to
justice.
He urges all concerned to exercise restraint and extends his deepest
condolences to the families of the victims of this attack.
"surreal_ravi" wrote in message
news:1105982108.715573.279190@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Godhra an accident: Banerjee report
>
> HindustanTimes.com/Agencies
>
> New Delhi, January 17, 2005|20:22 IST
>
> The high-level inquiry into the blaze in a train in Godhra in which 59
> persons were burnt to death that led to subsequent violence in Gujarat
> in 2002 has found that it was an "accidental fire".
>
> "It was not a deliberate attempt... and there is no evidence of any
> conspiracy," the interim report said.
>
> "With the elimination of the 'petrol theory', 'miscreant activity
> theory' as well as the ruling out of any possibility of 'electrical
> fire', the fire in S-6 coach of Sabarmati Express can at this stage be
> ascribed as an 'accidental fire'," Justice UC Banerjee Committee,
> appointed by Railway Minister Lalu Prasad, said in its report.
>
> Retired Supreme Court judge UC Banerjee, the chairman of the panel set
> up to investigate the incident, submitted the report to Railway Board
> Chairman RK Singh.
>
> Noting that there has been a preponderance of evidence that the fire
> originated in the coach itself without any external input, the
> committee "completely ruled out" the possibility of an inflammable
> liquid having been used as there was a smell of burning first, followed
> by dense smoke and flames thereafter.
>
> "This sequence is not possible in case the fire is caused by
> inflammable liquid thrown on the floor of the coach or an inflammable
> object thrown from outside the coach," the two-part interim report
> said.
>
> The Committee headed by former Supreme Court Judge UC Banerjee was
> constituted on September 4 last year following a Union Cabinet decision
> to inquire into certain aspects of the incident of fire on the
> Ahmedabad-bound Sabarmati Express at Godhra on February 27, 2002.
>
> The initial term of the committee was for a period of three months and
> was subsequently extended by another three months.
>
> The Committee said that the 'inflammable liquid theory' also was
> negated by the statement of some of the passengers, who suffered
> injuries on the upper portion of the body and not the lower body, and
> who crawled towards the door on elbows and could get out without much
> injury.
>
> Observing that the report could be "unpalatable for the Railways whose
> entire approach seemed to be casual", Banerjee told reporters that
> there had been a failure on the part of the Railways and the
> Commissioner of Railway Safety to conduct a statutory inquiry into the
> accident.
>
> "This was in breach of the Railway Act as well as the Accident Manual
> of the Zonal Railway," it said.
>
> The report said that the Railway administration had also not made any
> concerted effort to preserve clues of the incident.
>
> In particular, the Committee criticised the onward travel to Ahmedabad
> of S-7 coach despite some damage to it and despite it being a crucial
> piece of evidence.
>
> "In fact, the damaged portion of S-7 has been disposed of as scrap," it
> said.
>
> The entire hierarchy of Western Railway came in for severe criticism
> for pre-judging the issue by describing the fire incident as a
> "miscreant activity without conducting even a preliminary inquiry".
>
> The Committee noted that neither the then Railway Minister nor members
> of the Board visited the site of the accident or the injured
> passengers.
>
> The Committee said that on the basis of available evidence, it was
> "unbelievable that 'Kar Sevaks' (to the extent of 90 per cent of total
> occupants) armed with 'Trishuls', would allow to get themselves burnt
> without a murmur by miscreant activity like a person entering S-6 coach
> from outside and setting the coach on fire".
>
> It noted the forensic laboratory's experiment and verified its
> conclusion that it was "impossible to set fire to the train from
> outside".
>
> The Committee has received evidence of cooking inside the coach by Kar
> Sevaks.
>
> The Committee in its report said that "on the basis of evidence
> available on record, it was found that the train left the platform at
> around 7.48 am and stopped on account of vacuum failure in some coaches
> and the train started again at about 08.00 am."
>
> "Relying on the Survey of India Mapping of Distances and given the
> speed of the train at that time, the Committee noted that the engine
> ought to take about five minutes time to be near the post at 468/19 and
> the Guard's coach at 468/45. It is at this juncture that the smoke was
> not only noticed but had been reported to GRP, RPF and Vadodara
> Control."
>
> "There was, thus, no scope for any miscreant activity from any external
> agency during this period," the report said.
>
|
|
|
