Asianet NewsableAsianet Newsable

Morbi bridge collapse: Municipal body chief suspended for 'negligence'

Nine people, including two managers of OREVA Group and two sub-contractors, have been booked under Indian Penal Code section 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder).

Morbi bridge collapse: Municipal body chief suspended for 'negligence' AJR
Author
First Published Nov 4, 2022, 11:11 AM IST

The municipal body chief of Gujarat's Morbi city was on Friday (November 4) suspended a day after interrogation for more than four hours and search and recovery operation was called off on Thursday.

As many as 135 people lost their lives after a British-era cable bridge collapsed on the Machchhu river in Morbi town of Gujarat on October 30. On Thursday, the state government on Thursday called off the five-day-long search operation launched after the tragic incident.

Also read: Morbi bridge collapse: Search and recovery operation ends, death toll at 135

Sandeepsinh Zala, the municipal corporation chief officer was questioned on Thursday by the police for four hours. The police sought his explanation over the agreement signed with Gujarat-based watchmaker Oreva to renovate the century-old cable bridge.

Meanwhile, a court was on Tuesday informed that the contractors who carried out the renovation work of the bridge were not qualified to carry out such jobs.

Nine people, including two managers of OREVA Group and two sub-contractors, have been booked under Indian Penal Code section 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder).

Also read: Army wants to buy 10 aerial targeting systems, 120 loiter munitions for border deployment

Citing Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report, prosecutor HS Panchal told the magistrate's court headed by Chief Judicial Magistrate MJ Khan that the flooring of the bridge was replaced but its cable was not replaced and it could not take the weight of the changed flooring.

According to PTI, Panchal also told the court that both the repairing contractors were "not qualified" to carry out such a work.

"Despite that, these contractors were given repair work of the bridge in 2007 and then in 2022. So the accused's custody was needed to find out what was the reason for choosing them and at whose instance they were chosen," the prosecutor had said.

Follow Us:
Download App:
  • android
  • ios