Local train deaths are alarming, auto closing doors needed: HC
Mumbai. Observing that it is "alarming" that thereare daily deaths due to commuters falling from trains, Bombay High Court on Friday suggested that Mumbai local trains have doors that automatically close to avoid overcrowding.
It mentioned the June 9 Mumbra train-fall incident in which five persons died.
"You (the railways) have to take action so that this should not happen again," said Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep Marne. They were hearing a PIL filed last year by Yatin Jadhav, a regular commuter, to direct the railways to submit a plan to reduce or eliminate fatalities due to untoward incidents.
Asked by the judges what measures were taken by the railways, additional solicitor general Anil Singh said a high-level monitoring committee (HLMC) was already constituted to suggest safety and security measures.
After the Mumbra incident, a multi-disciplinary committee was set up. It is examining the causes of the incident and shall soon suggest remedial measures.
The judges referred to the railways' reply and said what "disturbs" is that in 2024 there were 3,588 deaths in Central Railway and Western Railway, which averages to 10 deaths per day. "So every day 10 Mumbaikars die by falling. And these numbers of deaths are due to falling down from trains, being hit by poles, or gaps between the footboard and the platform," said Justice Marne, adding, "This is an alarming situation.
This is your own data, though you projected that there is a reduction by 46% as compared to 2009."
Singh said HLMC suggested the construction of partitions or walls near tracks to avoid trespass and for fencing between tracks so there is no crossing. "As platforms are becoming overcrowded, we have shifted certain stalls from the stations. There are many measures which we are taking," he added.
Justice Marne said, "Fencing and all is to take care of deaths because of crossing etc."
Justice Marne asked, "What about people falling? Commuters who are on the train are falling." The judges said trains should not be open so that there is no scope for overcrowding. "You should provide automatic doors which close. This is one of the suggestions as a layman. We are not experts in rail safety," the Chief Justice said.
Senior advocate Rohan Shah, for Jadhav, said the June 9 incident happened due to overcrowding. While the railways' reply said trains cannot have closed doors, after the incident the railway minister said trains will have closed doors and "we are owrking towards it". Adjourning the hearing to July 14, the judges directed the railways to submit suggestions of both committees "to avoid untoward incidents in future" and "clearly indicate the timelines with which measures recommended by the committee shall be implemented".
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
3 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Telangana HC seeks explanation over delay in opening government hospital
HYDERABAD: The Telangana High Court on Wednesday pulled up the state government for the inordinate delay in making operational a fully constructed and equipped 100-bedded government hospital in Alampur, Jogulamba Gadwal district. The court directed the government to file its response within two weeks, explaining the reasons for not commencing regular medical services at the facility. A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Renuka Yara expressed serious concern over the continued inaction, questioning why the hospital - built at a cost of Rs 21 crore and completed in October 2023 - remains non-functional even 18 months after completion. During the hearing, Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul observed, 'A 100-bedded hospital has been constructed in Alampur, but the state government is not opening it, not providing staff, and the equipment remains unused.' The Bench directed the government counsel to obtain clear instructions from relevant departments on the reasons for the delay. The directive came in response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by social activist and politician S Ramchandra Reddy, a resident of Ieeja in Jogulamba Gadwal district. The petitioner alleged that despite several representations to the authorities, the hospital has not been made functional, depriving the people of Alampur of basic medical services.
New Indian Express
3 hours ago
- New Indian Express
‘Senior IAS officer should set high example', says Orissa HC, bins Bishnupada's plea against CBI probe
CUTTACK: The Orissa High Court on Friday dismissed IAS officer Bishnupada Sethi's petition seeking quashing of the ongoing CBI probe over his alleged link with a senior officer of a central PSU who was arrested in a Rs 10 lakh bribery case. On December 8 last year, the CBI officials arrested the group general manager of the PSU, on charges of taking Rs 10 lakh bribe from a real estate company promising them work orders. Sethi's name came up during the PSU official's interrogation. A CBI team conducted a search operation at his official residence in Bhubaneswar on February 18. Sethi along with his wife and daughter filed a petition on February 24. Taking up the petition for hearing the next day, Justice SK Panigrahi had passed an interim order stating, 'No coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners till the next date.' However, in the judgment on Friday, Justice Panigrahi dismissed Sethi's petition saying it was devoid of merit. 'The petition is dismissed as premature and not maintainable, the investigation being at an ongoing stage. The CBI is at liberty to continue its investigation in accordance with law, without any interference from this court. The reliefs sought by the petitioners to interdict or quash the FIR/investigation are refused.' The HC also expressed its disapproval over Sethi's conduct. 'As a senior IAS officer, petitioner 1 (Bishnupada Sethi) is expected to set a high example in upholding the law. The court is constrained to note its disapproval of the petitioner's attempt to invoke the extraordinary writ jurisdiction in the midst of an investigation, without exhausting the ordinary processes provided under law. Such attempts smack of forum-shopping and an impatience with the ordinary course of justice,' Justice Panigrahi remarked. 'There is no showing that the CBI's investigation is transgressing any legal provision; hence this court must not micro-manage or prematurely halt it. Investigative agencies must be allowed the operational freedom to pursue leads and uncover facts, especially in matters involving serious economic offences and corruption,' Justice Panigrahi further observed.
Indian Express
5 hours ago
- Indian Express
Bombay HC dismisses 2 PILs against Lloyds Metals
The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has dismissed two public interest litigations (PILs) challenging the grant of permission to the capacity expansion of the Surjagarh iron ore mines of Lloyds Metals and Energy Ltd (LMEL) in Gadchiroli. While the PILs were quashed on May 9, the order copy was uploaded on June 19. The high court found both the PILs to be without merit. The PILs filed by Samarjeet Chatterjee, a mining contractor from Raipur, Chhattisgarh, alleged that the process of environmental clearance (EC) granted by the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) for expansion of mining capacity from 3 million tonnes per annum (MTPA) to 10 MTPA and further Terms of Reference (ToR) towards expansion from 10 MTPA to 26 MTPA were 'illegal'. The division bench comprising Justices Nitin Sambre and Abhay Mantri observed that 'the complete procedure based on the ToR is followed,' and found that both the PILs were devoid of merit. The petitioner also alleged that the public hearing was conducted at a place far away from the project site. The court observed, 'The fact remains that in compliance with the Environmental Impact Assessment notification dated May 29, 2006, as amended on December 01, 2009, a public hearing was conducted at the [Gadchiroli] District Headquarters, which is perhaps properly secured in view of the Naxal menace.' The counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioner has no locus standi, and since he never attended the public hearing conducted by the collector at the district headquarters, he lost the opportunity to question the legality of the orders impugned in these PILs. Further, the counsel submitted that the initial EC was granted in 2005-06 after the hearing conducted by the collector at the very same place, and the said hearing was never questioned by the petitioner for the last 20 years. The counsel added that the EC for 10 MTPA was issued by the MoEF&CC under strict compliance with and adherence to the provisions of the EIA Notification dated May 29, 2006 and the SOP issued by the ministry. Though the public hearing was conducted at Gadchiroli district headquarters on the recommendation of the Police Department as the project site fell within the Naxal-affected area, all the locals were given due opportunity to present their say on the mining project, the court observed. The high court further stated that the courts should be sensitive and careful to the fact that the petitioner should not be allowed to indulge in making wild and reckless allegations. Since the petitioner stated that his annual income was Rs 4-5 lakh, the court observed, 'We fail to understand as to what is the source of expenses incurred by the petitioner as there is a serious doubt about his bona fides also'. With due observations, the high court dismissed both the PILs without costs.
