Jaipur-Mumbai train shooting case: Dismissed RPF constable Chetan Singh fit to stand trial, says court
Singh allegedly gunned down his senior and three passengers with his service rifle on Jaipur-Mumbai Superfast Express in 2023.
Resuming his deposition before Dindoshi sessions court on Monday, dismissed RPF head constable Narendra Parmar (60) from Ahmedabad, an eyewitness, said that one of the victims, Asghar Shaikh, pleaded with Singh for mercy just moments before being shot twice in the chest in the S6 compartment of the Jaipur-Mumbai Superfast Express in 2023.
Parmar recalled how Shaikh said, "Mai aam mulazim hoon. Main bhi bhagwan ko manta hoon… Bhagwan and Allah ek hai…" (I am just an ordinary employee.
I also believe in God. God and Allah are one).
Parmar was dismissed along with RPF constable Amey Acharya for failure to discharge their duty.
You Can Also Check:
Mumbai AQI
|
Weather in Mumbai
|
Bank Holidays in Mumbai
|
Public Holidays in Mumbai
On July 31, 2023, Singh allegedly gunned down his senior, assistant sub-inspector (ASI) Tikaram Meena, in B5 of the express train, followed by a passenger, Kadar Bhanpurwala, in the same coach between Vaitarna and Mira Road stations.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
The Most Beautiful Female Athletes Right Now
womensportsonline.com
Undo
He then went to coach B2, where he allegedly took another passenger, Syed Saifuddin, to the pantry car at gunpoint and shot him. Singh then allegedly shot Shaikh in coach S6 and gave a communally charged speech while standing next to the blood-splattered body.
Continuing his deposition, Parmar said he wanted to stop Singh but could not do so because there were several passengers between them. Parmar stated that Singh was visibly angry, and he feared that if he tried to restrain him, more passengers would be shot, or he would be shot himself.
He also said that there were passengers even behind Singh.
Parmar said that before Shaikh's murder, he followed Singh into the S6 coach. Parmar said his bag was in S6. When he reached the coach, Singh was holding a rifle in a "ready position", while passengers, some awake and others sleeping, looked on in fear. Parmar said that Singh was talking to a passenger. When shown photographs of the bodies recovered, Parmar identified the passenger as Shaikh.
He said Shaikh had a beard and was wearing a grey kurta.
After this failed attempt to de-escalate the situation, Parmar moved to B1 coach, where he called Acharya and instructed him to alert the control room. The train stopped between Mira Road and Dahisar stations due to a chain-pulling. One passenger, who identified himself as Ibrahim Batatawala, confessed to pulling the chain because he felt threatened by Singh's rifle.
According to other passengers, Singh alighted from the train. Parmar and train guard Vikas Jena too jumped onto the tracks. They later got back in and signalled the motorman. "He started the train and finally stopped at Borivali railway station. Thereafter, I alighted at Borivli station. There were a lot of police gathered. I saw Meena's body at the south side of B5 coach near the bathroom, and on the north side of the same coach, a passenger was dead.
We gathered all four bodies and sent them in an ambulance for postmortem examination," Parmar said. "I met Amey (Acharya) at Borivli station. Amey told me that Singh was ill and he was insisting with Meena to get off from the train. "Woh zidd kar raha tha [He was insisting]."
Parmar also identified two "command forms", which detail escort duties, weapons, and personnel on a specific train. Identification of physical evidence, including four empty cartridges and pieces of a red belt, had to be postponed until the following day because the items had to be retrieved from the strong room.
Dressed in track pants and a T-shirt, Singh appeared distracted throughout the proceedings. He was brought to the court premises in handcuffs and was kept away in a separate room until the hearing. The judge said Singh was not to be transferred out of Thane Central Jail without the court's prior permission.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Sean 'Diddy' Combs is DENIED bail on $50 million bond; to await sentencing on prostitution-related conviction
FILE - In this courtroom sketch, flanked by defense attorneys Teny Geragos, left, and Brian Steel, right, Sean "Diddy" Combs, center, reacts after he was denied bail on prostitution-related offenses, July 2, 2025, in Manhattan federal court in New York. (Elizabeth Williams via AP, File) FILE - In this courtroom sketch, flanked by defense attorneys Teny Geragos, left, and Brian Steel, right, Sean "Diddy" Combs, center, reacts after he was denied bail on prostitution-related offenses, July 2, 2025, in Manhattan federal court in New York. (Elizabeth Williams via AP, File) 1 2 S ean "Diddy" Combs can't go home from jail to await sentencing on his prostitution-related conviction, a judge said Monday, denying the rap and style mogul's latest bid for bail. Combs has been behind bars since his September arrest. He faced federal charges of coercing girlfriends into having drug-fueled sex marathons with male sex workers while he watched and filmed them. He was acquitted last month of the top charges - racketeering and sex trafficking - while being convicted of two counts of a prostitution-related offense. What Happens Next In denying Combs' $50 million bond proposal, Judge Arun Subramanian said the hip hop impresario hadn't proven that he did not pose a flight risk or danger, nor shown an "exceptional circumstance" that would justify his release after a conviction that otherwise requires detention. Combs' arguments "might have traction in a case that didn't involve evidence of violence, coercion or subjugation in connection with the acts of prostitution at issue, but the record here contains evidence of all three," the judge wrote. Prosecutors declined to comment on the ruling. Messages seeking comment were sent to Combs' lawyers. Diddy Could Face 10 Years In Prison The conviction carries the potential for up to 10 years in prison. But there are complicated federal guidelines for calculating sentences in any given case, and prosecutors and Combs' lawyers disagree substantially on how the guidelines come out for his case. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like No annual fees for life UnionBank Credit Card Apply Now Undo The guidelines aren't mandatory, and Subramanian will have wide latitude in deciding Combs' punishment. The Bad Boy Records founder, now 55, was for decades a protean figure in pop culture. A Grammy-winning hip hop artist and entrepreneur with a flair for finding and launching big talents, he presided over a business empire that ranged from fashion to reality TV. During the trial, four women testified that Combs had beaten or sexually assaulted them. Jurors also watched video of Combs hurling one of his former girlfriends, R&B singer Cassie, to the floor, repeatedly kicking her and then and dragging her down a hotel hallway. His lawyers argued that the government tried to criminalize consensual, if unconventional, sexual tastes that played out in complicated relationships. The defense acknowledged that Combs had violent outbursts but said nothing he did came amounted to the crimes with which he was charged. Lawyers Trying To Get Him Out Since the verdict, his lawyers have repeatedly renewed their efforts to get him out on bail until his sentencing, set for October. They have argued that the acquittals undercut the rationale for holding him, and they have pointed to other people who were released before sentencing on similar convictions. Defense lawyer Marc Agnifilo suggested in a court filing that Combs was the United States' "only person in jail for hiring adult male escorts for him and his girlfriend." Agnifilo also raised concerns about squalor and danger at the Metropolitan Detention Center, the notorious federal lockup where Combs is being held. The judge wrote Monday that those conditions were a "serious" consideration, but he said Combs hadn't shown that unique circumstances -- such as advanced age or medical issues -- would warrant his release. The defense's most recent proposal included the $50 million bond, plus travel restrictions, and expressed openness to adding on house arrest at his Miami home, electronic monitoring, private security guards and other requirements.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Two men threaten to throw child off building & end life to oppose PCMC's action against illegal structure; booked
1 2 Pune: Two residents of Old Sangvi allegedly threatened to end life by suicide and throw their three-year-old child off an unauthorised two-storied building if civic officials went ahead with anti-encroachment drive. According to Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation (PCMC) officials, the anti-encroachment team had reached the unauthorised structure located on Shivanjali Road around 7am on Saturday. Its owner allegedly locked himself inside the house with the family and refused to open the door. A civic official said he then held the child near the window's protective grille and threatened to throw him down. He too threatened to die by suicide if the civic officials did not halt the proposed demolition. PCMC later lodged an FIR against two people for allegedly obstructing an anti-encroachment drive. The Sangvi police registered a case against Rajaram Sahebrao Lad and Nilesh Rajaram Lad under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, including 132 (assault or use of criminal force to deter a public servant from discharge of duty), 267 (intentionally insulting or interrupting a public servant during judicial proceedings) and 352 (intentional insult with intent to provoke a breach of peace), 351(2) [criminal intimidation], along with other applicable sections. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Compare Spreads: Bitcoin vs Ethereum CFDs IC Markets Learn More Undo You Can Also Check: Pune AQI | Weather in Pune | Bank Holidays in Pune | Public Holidays in Pune An officer from the Sangvi police said, "The accused have been absconding after the incident. We are yet to record their statements to proceed with the investigation." An official from the PCMC's anti-encroachment department said the unauthorised structure's owner was earlier served a notice to remove it voluntarily. "The civic team proceeded with the demolition plan because he failed to comply with the notice. The action had to be halted because of the threats," he said, adding that the unauthorised structure would be demolished soon as a part of the ongoing drive against illegal constructions. Last month, the PCMC launched a crackdown on unauthorised constructions, particularly focusing on under-construction structures. As a part of the drive, action is being taken not only against entirely illegal structures but also against buildings where additional floors were constructed without obtaining the necessary permissions. Pimpri Chinchwad municipal commissioner Shekhar Singh in a meeting issued a stern warning of disciplinary action against the officials failing to act against unauthorised constructions in their respective jurisdictions. The initiative aims to curb illegal construction activities at an early stage, thereby preventing the need for demolitions after structures are completed.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
5 more cases against Srushti Clinic head
Hyderabad: Gopalapuram police have registered five new cases against the head of Srushti Fertility Clinic Dr Athaluri Namratha alias Pachipala Namratha, and others based on complaints lodged by five sets of victims. While in one case a couple alleged that the doctor handed them a baby whose DNA did not match theirs, three other couples accused the clinic of adopting dubious methods. They claimed that they had already paid the money — anywhere from Rs 12.5 lakh to Rs 19 lakh — and even deposited their biological samples when they grew suspicious about the operations of Dr Namratha and her clinic. The frauds occurred between 2019 and 2025. Cops are yet to ascertain details of the fifth case. You Can Also Check: Hyderabad AQI | Weather in Hyderabad | Bank Holidays in Hyderabad | Public Holidays in Hyderabad Case 1: DNA mismatch causes trauma A woman from Hyderabad, requesting anonymity, alleged that she and her husband had approached Universal Srushti Fertility & Research Centre in July 2024 for infertility treatment. Dr Namratha advised gestational surrogacy using the couple's own genetic material and assured them that all legal formalities would be handled by them. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like American Investor Warren Buffett Recommends: 5 Books For Turning Your Life Around Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo The couple paid Rs 16.5 lakh for hormone therapy, laboratory work, and surrogate expenses. Their egg and sperm samples were collected at the clinic's Visakhapatnam branch on September 18, 2024. A baby girl was delivered via caesarean section on June 16, 2025, at a Visakhapatnam-based hospital. "Initially, we were told by the doctors that the baby was healthy, but they later shifted her to the NICU, terming her as late pre-term," the woman said. The couple's suspicions arose after Srushti staff refused to divulge the surrogate mother's details. Their fears deepened after they were unable to observe any facial resemblance with the baby, which prompted them to go for an independent DNA test. "The results, which came out on July 12, confirmed that neither of us was biologically related to the child," the complainant alleged. When confronted on July 22, Dr Namratha allegedly admitted that donor gametes were mistakenly used, and asked the couple to return the infant so the clinic could seek govt adoption clearance and repeat the procedure with their samples. The parents refused and approached the police, citing immense emotional trauma and legal uncertainty over the child's status. It is learnt that the child is still in the custody of the couple. The police have registered a case against Dr Namratha, Dr Vidyulatha, Kalyani, Sheshagiri, and Srinivasa Reddy under sections 61 (2), 316 (2), 318(4), 111, 335, 336, 340 BNS & Sections 38, 39, and 40 of the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021. Case 2: Rs 12.5 lakh lost in fraudulent surrogacy deal Another couple from the city approached police alleging they were duped of Rs 12.5 lakh by Dr Namratha and others through a fraudulent surrogacy deal. The husband, a 34-year-old private employee from the city, alleged that he and his wife approached Dr Namratha in Nov 2024 for a surrogate baby. Between April and May 2025, the couple paid Rs 10 lakh for tests and collection of 'biological samples' at the Secunderabad branch. On June 26, Dr Namratha allegedly informed them that the "baby is ready," indicating successful initiation of surrogacy, and collected Rs 2.5 lakh more. Though Dr Namratha assured that the baby would be delivered on February 3, 2026, the couple became suspicious when the hospital repeatedly refused to reveal the surrogate's identity, produce consent forms, or show proof of court permission, and decided to approach the police. A case was registered against Dr Namratha, her associates, Chenna Rao, and Sureka under relevant sections of BNS & the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021. Case 3: NRI couple loses Rs 19 lakh A US-based NRI couple who approached Universal Srushti Fertility and Research Centre in December 2019 for infertility treatment allegedly lost Rs 19 lakh to the accused. The husband, a 49-year-old software professional, and his wife approached Dr Namratha who, quoting a high success rate, charged Rs 7 lakh in cash and collected the couple's biological samples. After an unsuccessful embryo transfer, the couple returned to the USA. In January 2020, Dr Namratha advised the couple to opt for a surrogacy procedure costing Rs 25 lakh. The complainant's brother paid Rs 12 lakh in cash as an initial instalment. "The clinic provided no documents about medical procedures or statutory clearances. Due to Covid-19, I could not personally meet the doctor, and when I reached the fertility centre on Sunday, I came to know about the recent case against Dr Namratha," the complainant alleged. A case was registered against Dr Namratha under relevant sections of the BNS. Case 4: Nalgonda couple alleges Rs 11 lakh fraud A couple from Nalgonda alleged that Dr Namratha and her associates duped them of Rs 11 lakh with a false assurance of providing them with a child through a surrogacy procedure. The 49-year-old man and his wife first approached Universal Srushti Fertility Centre in June 2024 after unsuccessful IVF treatment attempts. Dr Namratha suggested surrogacy, and the couple paid Rs 9 lakh through UPI and Rs 2 lakh in cash between May 20 and July 2, 2025, and their samples were collected at the Secunderabad facility. "Despite the payments, the hospital neither produced proof of necessary legal permissions. They collected samples from us but did not start the surrogacy procedure," the complaint alleged. On learning about the other complaints against the facility, the victim approached the police on Sunday, and a case was registered against Dr Namratha, her associates, Archana, Dr Sadanandam, Chenna Rao, and Sureka under relevant Sections of the BNS.
