Why they always hold the train driver responsible for every train accident even before the inquiry could be conducted and was there sufficient reasons for this statement or it was a willful lie. What is the Truth behind Mathura train accident

Truth behind Mathura train accident

A rescue operation was in full swing at the train accident site at Mathura in which at least 22 persons reportedly died and many others suffered injuries.

mathura train accident

Lets us see what statements were made by the Railways Officers made soon after the accident:

1. According to Divisional Railway Manager, Rajendra Dutt Tripathi, the driver of Goa Express had overlooked the signal leading to accident.
2. The second statement regarding this particular train accident was that “the signaling system is fool proof”.
3. The third statement that came from other officers was that The train driver fatigue angle was ruled out since the  train working time was only 5-6 hours.

Why they always hold the train driver responsible for every train accident even before the inquiry could be conducted and was there sufficient reasons  for this statement or it was a willful lie.

let us see what actually happened.

The information that the signal protecting Gate no 243 had gone defective at about 2:30 am was received in the Railway control office.

At 3:30 am the driver of a goods train was given written instruction to detrain signal maintenance staff at the spot to repair the defective signal.

The signal maintenance staff started to rectify the fault but found that after passage of the Mewar express and even after passage of considerable time the signal was not changing aspect from danger(Red) to green.

Mean while the driver of Goa express brought the speed down to 3 kmph (this drop in speed was recorded in the speed chart) and was just about to take the halt at the gate signal which was at that time showing red aspect.

The maintenance staff  presuming that the Mewar express might  have cleared the section, changed the aspect of signal from red to green by interfering with the signaling system even though the Mewar express was held up due to Alarm chain pulling by passengers.

After getting the Green signal The driver of Goa express resumed normal speed But the Mewar express was standing a few kilometers and the train accident took place at 4:30 am at night time.

This above information is taken from the inquiry report and has been proved that the signaling system was tempered with.

Now you can understand clearly that the signaling system may be fool proof but not if it is deliberately tempered with.

please do not think that that it is a rare event that had happened on that particular day but the  personal experience of Central railway Motorman (last 17 years) says that thesignaling  system is tempered with several time a day at every single station. In the name of Punctuality of Train the signaling staff is kept under pressure and therefore they resort to these practices.

The same types of train accident keeps on repeating at a regular intervals and that This train accident is a exact replica of the train accident that took place between Konark and Sidheshwar express in june 1985  where in the Sidheshwar Express rammed in to stationary Konark Express which was held up due the Alarm Chain Pulling and the staff presuming that the Train might have cleared & that the signal might have gone defective changed the  aspect of signal to  Green from Red. Thus causing on of the biggest train accidents of India.

Regarding the officers pointing that there is no question of fatigue angle for driver since that train working was only 5-6 hours.
This statement was also not true even though it was not the reason for this particular train accident. The train working schedule of the train driver involved in that accident (and also of his colleagues ) involves 22 night train working in 30 days and 3 weekly rests in a period of 54 days. Just imagine the work load on the person responsible for safety of about 3000 passengers.

There fore all the above three statements are proved to be untrue.