Incident Could Have Been Prevented: Gujarat High Court Upholds Removal Of Railway Police Constables In 2002 Godhra Train Burning Case

The Gujarat High Court has upheld the removal of Railway Police Constables in 2002 Godhra Train Burning Case.

The Court was deciding Special Civil Applications filed by the unarmed police constables and armed police constables in the Gujarat Railway Police in the Mobile Squad.

A Single Bench of Justice Vaibhavi D. Nanavati remarked, “Considering the charges framed against the petitioners as referred to herein-above, wherein, petitioners are all police staffs and are duty bound to travel from Chalit Chowki in Sabarmati express, leaving from Dahod, as per the duty assigned to the petitioners on 27.02.2002. The petitioners made bogus entries in the register and return in Ahmedabad by Shanti express. If, the petitioners had departed in Sabarmati express train itself to reach Ahmedabad, the incident that have occurred at Godhra could have been prevented.”

Senior Advocate Shalin Mehta and Advocate Aditi Raol appeared for the Petitioners while Additional Advocate General (AAG) Manisha Lavkumar Shah and Assistant Government Pleader (AGP) Jay Trivedi appeared for the Respondents.

Factual Background

The Petitioners were total nine number i.e., 1 ASI, 4 Head Constables, 3 Armed Police Constables, and 1 Police Constable. They were assigned the duty of patrolling in the trains between two Railway Stations i.e., Ahmedabad (Kalupur) and Dahod (mobile chowki). As per the allotted duty, the Petitioners were to travel by Rajkot-Bhopal Express up to Dahod and from Dahod, they were to return back by Sabarmati Express. The Petitioners left Ahmedabad Railway Station by Rajkot-Bhopal Express as usual on February 26, 2002 and reached Dahod.

Upon reaching Ahmedabad, they came to know that, S-6 coach of Sabarmati Express which reached Godhra Railway Station at around 07:53 hours was burnt, due to which 58 unfortunate passengers died on the spot. Thereafter, the Petitioners were placed under suspension by the then District Superintendent of Police (Railway). Pursuantly, a final order of removal of the Petitioners was passed against which they preferred a Departmental Appeal. The said Appeal was rejected by the Additional DGP and hence, the Petitioners filed the Revision Application before the Additional Chief Secretary. Pending the said Application, the Petitioners approached the High Court.

Reasoning

The High Court in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, observed, “The petitioners derelict negligence and carelessness towards their duty. The said charges stands proved. The order of removal is passed, considering the aforesaid charge and the petitioners are not charged with the criminal conspiracy. The respondent disciplinary authority passed the order of removal under Rule-3(2) of the Bombay Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1956, which is upheld concurrently by Appellate Authority and Revisional Authority by reasoned findings.”

The Court said that the Petitioners have not performed their duties entrusted to them itself proves the case against them and that they were entrusted the duty in Sabarmati Express train.

“… 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 reasonings assigned by the competent authorities do not call for any interference”, it added.

Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Petitions.

Cause Title- Gulabsinh Devusinh Jhala & Ors. v. State of Gujarat & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025:GUJHC:24473)

Click here to read/download the Judgment