Central Railway submits action plan on track safety to Bombay High Court
The disclosure was made through an affidavit filed by Pravindra Wanjari, Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, Mumbai Division of Central Railway, in connection with a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed in 2024, which sought urgent measures to address fatalities from track crossing and falls on Mumbai's suburban rail network.
According to the Railways, preliminary observations from the Mumbra incident pointed to a dangerous combination of 'track curvature' and 'passenger imbalance' caused by the simultaneous passing of two fast local trains.
A multi-disciplinary team all based in Mumbai, CSMT, who were constituted to investigate the incident included key officials from divisional heads of respective branches having knowledge in rail safety and operations: Senior Divisional Safety Officer, Senior Divisional Security Commissioner, Senior Divisional Operations Manager (General), Senior Divisional Engineer (South), and the Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer (Traction Rolling Stock Operations).
The officials are conducting a detailed investigation into the accident to find out the actual cause and find a resolution to passenger safety concerns. The report of the committee is under investigation.
The affidavit noted that while the Railways was implementing a series of long-term structural upgrades, real-time mitigation continued to be constrained by land acquisition delays, monsoon conditions, and high traffic volume that restricted daytime work. 'Central Railway Suburban system in itself is a complex network. During monsoon, the work gets slowed down, as no digging is done due to safety reasons. Further, the work is to be carried out ensuring the safety of a large volume of traffic. Major work is carried out only during night blocks. Supervisors are simultaneously engaged for regular maintenance works. Land acquisition issues, encroachment issues, public resentment in encroachment removal and boundary wall construction etc., also delay the work. Railway Administration is committed to provide safe and comfortable journey to the commuters, and all sincere efforts are always taken in that regard. The difficulties in execution of works may kindly be appreciated, and it may not kindly be construed as inaction or slow action,' the Railways informed the court.
Safety measures
The High Court was also informed of several safety initiatives already implemented under the 'Mission Zero Death' campaign. These included fencing at 47 platforms, plugging of 204 trespass-prone openings, removal of over 1,260 encroachments, and installation of warning systems and illusionary posters at high-risk spots.
At Diva station, where accidents were frequent, a targeted combination of escalators, barbed wire barriers, platform fencing, and continuous RPF deployment has led to a marked reduction in fatalities, with no reported deaths since August 2023.
To address the issue of falls from moving trains, the Railways has undertaken knurling on grab poles, added extra handles in Siemens rakes, and slewed tracks to reduce crowding between major stations like Sion-Kurla and Mulund-Thane. Over 800 establishments have been requested to stagger office timings to ease peak-hour pressure.
In the long term, the Railways plans to construct 43 new foot overbridges (FOBs), install 139 escalators and 62 lifts by December 2027, and implement major corridor upgrades, including the Panvel-Karjat and Kalva-Airoli suburban links, and a new Thane station to decongest the central line.
Data submitted by the Railways showed that in 2024 alone, 674 people died from track crossing and 387 from falling off trains. In the first five months of 2025, 293 and 150 such deaths had already been recorded, respectively.
While affirming its commitment to commuter safety, the Railways urged the court to acknowledge the operational complexities of Mumbai's high-density rail system. 'Delays in work execution should not be construed as inaction. We remain committed to improving passenger safety,' the affidavit stated.
The High Court has given two weeks' time to the petitioner to submit suggestions, if any, to the affidavit of the Railways.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
5 hours ago
- NDTV
Raids In Maharashtra Linked To Vasai-Virar Illegal Construction Scam
Mumbai: The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Tuesday launched a fresh round of raids in Maharashtra as part of its money-laundering investigation into an illegal construction scam, with a focus on former Vasai-Virar Municipal Commissioner Anil Pawar. His residence and office premises were among the 12 locations searched across Vasai, Virar, Nashik and Mumbai. The searches come just a day after Mr Pawar's official farewell following his transfer, intensifying suspicions about his alleged role in facilitating unauthorised building approvals during his tenure. The ED probe revolves around the construction of 41 illegal buildings on approximately 60 acres of land earmarked for a sewage treatment plant and dumping ground under the Vasai-Virar civic development plan. Probe agency alleges that several civic officials, in collusion with local builders, approved forged documents and fake sale agreements to enable these constructions. The buildings were sold primarily to lower-income buyers, many of whom were unaware of the legal violations. Earlier phases of the ED operation, conducted in May and July, uncovered widespread corruption involving town planning officials and political figures. Among those raided were YS Reddy, former Deputy Director of Town Planning, from whose Hyderabad residence ED recovered Rs 8.6 crore in cash and Rs 23 crore worth of jewellery and bullion. The agency also froze financial assets worth Rs 12 crore. Other individuals under scrutiny include Sitaram Gupta, an ex-corporator, from whose home Rs 45 lakh in cash was recovered hidden behind a plywood panel, and Vijay Tambat, allegedly connected to criminal networks. All 41 buildings were demolished earlier this year by court order, displacing around 2,500 families. The Bombay High Court and Supreme Court had mandated government-led rehabilitation efforts.
News18
a day ago
- News18
TIP-ping Point: 7/11 Blasts And Judicial Lottery
The 7/11 case has yet again raised disturbing questions about the moral compass of Indian criminal jurisprudence. The conscience of the nation stands enraged. Both possibilities speak volumes of systemic failure. Either the then coalition Government in Maharashtra in 2006 oversaw a catastrophic collapse in investigation and prosecution, letting terrorists walk free. Or we incarcerated innocent men for the last 19 years. Both scenarios paint a profoundly disturbing picture of our justice system. The 11 dark minutes of July 11, 2006, when seven coordinated bomb blasts ripped through Mumbai's suburban railway network, scarred the city forever. The carnage claimed 209 lives and injured over 700. Swift arrests followed; 13 men were accused, 12 were convicted – five sentenced to death, the rest to life imprisonment. But on July 21, 2025, the Bombay High Court acquitted all 12 convicted men. The Court found the prosecution to have faltered at the most fundamental level. The judgment exposes a central tension: a conflict between state capacity and judicial threshold. Crimes of this nature are intrinsically difficult to investigate and prosecute. Probes must navigate intricate webs of terror planning and execution, all while racing against time. Every passing moment results in evidentiary decay. Yet, when this challenge of capacity meets the rigorous standards of 'innocent until proven guilty', verdicts like the one in this case become inevitable. This case has yet again raised disturbing questions about the moral compass of Indian criminal jurisprudence. A recurring affliction in our criminal system is the doctrine of 'uncertain-fatality', an interpretive fragility that leaves outcomes to the temperaments of individual judges. The United States follows a clear standard- the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine, where any illegally procured evidence is automatically inadmissible. India has adopted a different course. Indian courts are notably more liberal in admitting evidence, even if tainted by illegality, choosing instead to assign it probative value after scrutiny. Our courts separate the wheat from the chaff, i.e., they painstakingly distinguish believable evidence from the rest. Yet this process of legal surgery varies by the skill and subjectivity of the surgeon. Similar cases with similar flaws have passed the muster before other courts. But the Bombay High Court, in this case, deemed the lapses to be fatal. The real fatality, it seems, is even-handed justice. Your ability to secure relief as a kin of the deceased now hinges disproportionately on the courtroom lottery. In this case, the Bombay High Court took a sword to the scalpel, with one blow, it declared the prosecution's case to have 'utterly failed.' The concern lies not in the judges having taken a particular view, but in the inconsistency and subjectivity with which criminal justice is dispensed. The Bombay High Court, while acquitting all convicts, based its reasoning primarily on the flawed Test Identification Parade (TIP). Put simply, in a TIP, the accused is made to stand in a lineup with others of similar physique and features, and the eyewitness is invited to pick out the suspect. The very act of correctly identifying the accused lends strength and credibility to the witness's courtroom testimony. Under Section 7 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, TIP serves a dual purpose: first, it helps the investigating agency confirm if they are on the right track; second, it offers corroboration for in-court identification. It becomes a critical evidentiary tool, helping place the accused at the relevant location and time. The procedure, however, is stringent. TIPs must be conducted by a Magistrate, not the police, and preferably within jail premises to minimise external influence. Witnesses must be called individually, barred from communication with each other, and asked to describe what they saw. Every reaction must be recorded in detail. In this case, the Bombay High Court excluded the identification evidence entirely. It held that TIPs were conducted by Shri Barve, a Special Executive Officer, who had no legal authority to carry them out. This procedural violation- TIPs must be supervised by a Magistrate, was not a mere technical lapse. According to the Court, it rendered the identification process void and left it open to manipulation. Consequently, the identifications made by witnesses were deemed inadmissible. The prosecution, which had heavily relied on these TIPs, now found itself without the very foundation of its case. What remained was dock identification, witnesses identifying the accused in court nearly four years later. But that raised a pivotal legal question: can someone credibly identify an individual they only saw momentarily, years ago, without memory aids or prior interaction? The High Court concluded they could not. No distinguishing features. No extended observation. No credibility. Thus, even the courtroom identifications were stripped of their evidentiary weight. The very eyewitness testimony on which the prosecution had built its case crumbled, ironically, not due to falsehood, but due to the prosecution's own procedural lapses. This would be an acceptable outcome, had other courts taken such a strict approach. But that is not the case. Courts across India continue to admit TIP evidence despite glaring procedural irregularities. That inconsistency needs urgent review by the Supreme Court of India. Another major blow to the prosecution was its reliance on stock witnesses- individuals who appear as panch or eyewitnesses in multiple unrelated cases. For instance, Vishal Parmar claimed to have seen Accused No. 4 board the train with a black rexine bag and disembark without it. The Court flagged him as unreliable, as he had served as a panch witness in multiple prior cases, including those involving officers from this very trial. His employer, Mukesh Rabadiya, was similarly discredited as a stock witness. Yet in Nana Keshav Lagad v. State of Maharashtra (2013), the Supreme Court clarified that merely appearing as a witness in multiple cases does not invalidate testimony by itself. This raises legitimate questions about the Bombay High Court's choice to outright dismiss such testimony here. The trouble is, this was bound to happen. When judicial discretion is left unbounded by consistent thresholds, some courts interpret lapses as fatal, others see them as fixable. This divergence undermines the rule of law. And the stakes are extraordinarily high in cases involving such enormous human tragedy. Just as troubling is the message this sends to the investigative machinery: that mistakes may or may not matter, depending on the bench. Impunity thrives in uncertainty. We urgently need clear, consistent, and constitutionally sound standards, replacing what has become a wild west of discretion in criminal procedure. Criminal justice must be precise. We must know what is acceptable and what is not. top videos View all The Supreme Court has issued notice in the criminal appeal. The legal questions answered by the Bombay High Court now await constitutional scrutiny. The author is a Senior Supreme Court Advocate and former Additional Solicitor General of India. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18's views. tags : 2006 Mumbai Train Blasts Mumbai train blasts view comments Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: July 28, 2025, 15:57 IST News opinion Opinion | TIP-ping Point: 7/11 Blasts And Judicial Lottery Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Indian Express
a day ago
- Indian Express
Beed sarpanch murder: proof points to Walmik Karad's crime syndicate links, court said while rejecting MCOCA discharge plea
In its detailed order rejecting a discharge plea by Walmik Karad, the main accused in the murder of a sarpanch in Maharashtra's Beed district, a special court has said that there is prima facie evidence to show that he is a member of an organised crime syndicate. The plea was rejected on July 22, and the full order was made available this week. Karad – a close aide of former NCP minister Dhananjay Munde – and others have been booked under the stringent Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) for the murder of Santosh Deshmukh on December 9, 2024. 'Validity of prior permission or sanction shall not be doubted at this juncture. Thus the statements of witnesses, material, technical, digital, scientific and forensic evidence prima facie reveal that the offence is committed by the applicant and co-accused persons,' the detailed order by special judge V H Patwadkar said. The prosecution said that between October and December 2024, the accused, including Karad, conspired and demanded ransom from a company to run their business in the district. When Massajog sarpanch Deshmukh intervened, a plan was made to abduct and murder him. Deshmukh was subsequently killed. The prosecution has claimed that the co-accused videographed the act and also made a video call to Karad. The prosecution cited 20 previous crimes filed against Karad, including that of unlawful assembly and attempt to murder, and said he was also convicted in one case. It added that the other accused were following the instructions of Karad, who is a member of the crime syndicate. Karad had filed the discharge plea stating he was falsely implicated for political reasons, and there was no crime syndicate as claimed by the police. He also questioned the validity of the sanction under the MCOCA given in February, claiming that due procedure was not followed while invoking the Act. He said no role was specified when it came to his involvement in the crime. Karad said the police deliberately hid the fact that among the cases cited, he was cleared in almost 15 of them, including the case in which he was convicted, and that the Bombay High Court had acquitted him in the appeal stage. Special Public Prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam submitted that the sanction for MCOCA was taken as per procedure and if it is dropped, the crime syndicate will continue its work, resulting in a grave law and order problem.
