The enquiry into the Utkal Express derailment that killed 20 people has run into a controversy with news reports claiming that it relied on “tampered evidence”. Even as Commissioner Railway Safety (CRS), who probed the accident, claims that he got the evidentiary documents from the Station Master at the site, officials in railway ministry say that the situation now calls for a judicial probe.
The Puri-Haridwar Utkal Express had derailed near Khatauli on August 19 due to some ongoing maintenance work on the track. The probe was conducted by CRS S.K. Pathak, who found that Northern Railway’s Operations Control Centre in Delhi had denied the “traffic block” which was sought by Permanent Way Inspector (PWI) of Khatauli Mohanlal Meena. A traffic block is a 15-minute window when trains are not allowed to run on the track in order to complete the repair work.
The “tampered evidence” in question is a Memo written by PWI Meena, asking for a block on the section where the Utkal Express derailed. The Memo was written by Meena to Khatauli Station Master Prakash Chand 45-minutes before the train derailed. The last line in the memo, taken as evidence by the CRS, reads – “unsafe hai, block dene ki kripa karein” (the track is unsafe, please allow a traffic block).
Based on the memo, the CRS concluded that the warning went unheeded. His report, submitted to railway ministry earlier this month, blames station master Chand for not stopping the train at the station despite knowing about the “unsafe track”. He also blames another PWI Pradeep Kumar for not securing the track. Kumar has been subsequently fired by the railways.
Now, it transpires that there is another memo sent by PWI Meena that does not mention the last line about the track being unsafe. According to an Indian Express report, there are two versions of the memo. One written on the day of the accident, that is, August 19, and the other on August 20. Both have the PWI’s signature. However, the August 19 memo is a carbon copy with the last line added later in pen and not as the carbon imprint. The other version – on August 20 – is original and does not have the line about unsafe track.
The news report claims that officials in Delhi brought this discrepancy to the notice of the CRS, who chose to ignore it. However, sources tell Outlook that the CRS being a quasi-judicial authority, is not bound to accept any communication unless it is told to him as part of the enquiry proceedings under oath. Sources say that it seems like a case of confusing the report so that the Operations Control Centre is absolved of the blame of not allowing the block. “The best way to resolve the issue is now a judicial enquiry,” says a senior Railway Board official.
