The Gujarat High Court has declined to transfer the investigation into the 2022 Morbi bridge collapse to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), a request made by the families of the victims.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi stated that the court could not scrutinise the ongoing investigation. The matter was being heard as part of a suo motu public interest litigation (PIL) initiated following the 30 October 2022 tragedy, in which 135 people lost their lives when a British-era suspension bridge over the Machchhu river in Morbi collapsed.
Relatives of some of the deceased had called for a reinvestigation by the CBI, accusing the Gujarat Police of failing to conduct a thorough inquiry. They argued that no civic officials were held accountable, despite a Special Investigation Team (SIT) implicating some in the incident.
In a separate application submitted last month, the victims urged for a CBI probe, claiming that the then district collector, who was involved in meetings regarding the awarding of the bridge’s maintenance contract to Oreva Group, had not had his statement recorded during the investigation.
During Thursday’s proceedings, advocate Rahul Sharma, representing the victims, sought to add murder charges to the primary FIR.
However, Advocate General Kamal Trivedi informed the bench that a chargesheet had been filed last year and the former chief officer of Morbi Nagarpalika, currently under suspension, is facing a disciplinary inquiry.
Chief Justice Agarwal noted that the request for a reinvestigation fell outside the scope of the PIL. “The chargesheet has already been filed and such matters cannot be contested through a PIL. For that, you must approach the sessions court handling the case. This is beyond the PIL’s purview. The court is focused on compensation and rehabilitation matters,” she told Sharma.
The chief justice further described the application as “misconceived”, emphasising that the district collector was not a signatory to the agreement with Oreva Group.
“Beyond compensation and rehabilitation, the PIL cannot examine the accuracy of the investigation. The request to quash the chargesheet is entirely misconceived, and the application is accordingly disposed of,” Chief Justice Agarwal concluded.
Also Read: Gujarat: Dahod Court Charges Principal With Rape and Murder Of Six-Year-Old
