GRP’S SIT seeks reports on ‘action’ against MC officials

AMRITSAR: THE Government Railways Police (GRP)’S special investigation team (SIT) has sought reports from the Amritsar municipal corporation (MC) on the “action taken” against its seven officials who were held responsible for the October 2018 Dussehra train tragedy that left 61 persons dead.

A speeding train had mowed several people who had gathered on the railway tracks to watch the burning of Ravana’s effigy at Dhobi Ghat near Jaura Phatak in Amritsar. Of the three probes into the tragedy, two have been completed and one is still underway. The first was conducted by chief commissioner (railway safety) SK Pathak, while the second (magisterial inquiry) was led by Jalandhar divisional commissioner B Purushartha on order of chief minister Amarinder Singh.

The third probe is being conducted by the GRP SIT led its assistant inspector (AIG) Daljit Singh Rana to “fix criminal responsibility” for the lapse that led to the incident.

The SIT has written to Amritsar MC commissioner Komal Mittal to provide the details of the reports pertaining to the “action taken” against the seven officials—sushant Bhatia (secretary), Kashmir Singh (additional divisional fire officer), Pushpinder Singh (superintendent), Girish Kumar (superintendent), Kewal Krishan (inspector), Kamaldeep Singh (supervisor) and Arun Kumar (clerk).

“The reports are required to probe the officials’ role in the criminal case registered after the tragedy,” the SIT letter reads.

The SIT was formed to probe the case registered under Sections 304-A (causing death by negligence), 337-338 (causing grievous hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others) of the Indian Penal Code against unidentified persons.

Mittal said the required reports would be furnished within two to three days.

The GRP’S SIT had to complete the probe in three months after the incident. The magisterial probe had indicted 23 persons, including organisers, policemen, railway employees and MC officials. After the probe, the MC had asked “indicted officials” to reply before initiating departmental action against them. On January 13, finding their reply “unsatisfactory”, the government had ordered another probe to ascertain their role in the case.