Sabarmati Burning Could've Been Prevented If Escort Cops Did Their Duty: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court has upheld the dismissal of nine police personnel for dereliction of duty, observing that had they followed proper procedures on the day of the Sabarmati train burning incident at Godhra railway station in 2002, the tragedy could potentially have been averted.
The court noted, “If the petitioners had departed in the Sabarmati express train itself to reach Ahmedabad, the incident that occurred at Godhra could have been prevented. The petitioners [displayed] derelict negligence and carelessness towards their duty. The said charges stand proved.” It concluded that the removal of the petitioners from service was justified.
The dismissed officers — Gulabsinh Devusinh Jhala, Khumansinh Jitsinh Rathod, Nathabhai Dhulabhai Bhabhi, Vinodbhai Bijalbhai, Jabir Hussain Rasul Miya Sheikh, Rasikbhai Rajabhai Parmar, Kishorbhai Devabhai Parmar, Kishorbhai Balubhai Patni, Punabhai Motibhai Bariya — were all part of the Railway Police Force and assigned to board the Sabarmati Express from Dahod on February 27, 2002. Instead, they allegedly made false entries in the movement register and returned to Ahmedabad via another train, the Shanti Express.
The Godhra incident — where the Sabarmati Express was set ablaze at the Godhra railway station, leading to the deaths of 59 persons — triggered one of the most violent communal riots in India’s recent history. The court underlined that the presence of the petitioners, had they followed their duty, might have made a difference in the unfolding of events that day.
As per the disciplinary inquiry, the petitioners were charged with abandoning their assigned duty, falsifying the duty register, and failing to travel with the train they were supposed to escort. The inquiry officer had found these charges proved, leading to their removal from service in 2005. Their appeal before the Appellate Authority was also rejected, prompting them to approach the high court.
The petitioners had contended that there was no evidence proving that they had willfully disobeyed orders or falsified records, and argued that their dismissal was disproportionate to the alleged misconduct. However, the high court found no procedural or substantive flaw in the inquiry or the punishment.
Justice Vaibhavi D Nanavati, who delivered the judgment, noted that the train belonged to 'A' category.
A category are such trains where the frequency of untoward incidents like chain snatching, altercations, etc. is high and as per the instruction issued to the concerned railway station, in such trains, at least 3 armed police personnel with rifles and cartridges had to be present, the rest of the ASIs were to be provided with sticks and ropes and additionally, the police officers in plain clothes, were also required to patrol the train.
"The petitioners, admittedly having been assigned such important duty, have casually thought it fit, not to travel by the assigned train and travelled by Shanti Express," the court noted while holding that the reasonings assigned by the competent authorities for the petitioners' dismissal did not call for any interference.
Case Title: Gulabsinh Devusinh Jhala and Others vs State of Gujarat and Others and connected matter
Download judgment here