Morbi Bridge Collapse: Victims Seek New Probe, Oreva Group MD Bail Denied

Ahmedabad : A poignant plea for justice echoes as families of the tragic Morbi bridge collapse victims in Gujarat have petitioned the District Sessions court, demanding a fresh investigation into the calamitous incident. Their petition, rooted in distrust of the ongoing Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe, highlights concerns of bias and an alleged lack of impartiality in the investigation process.

In another development, the Gujarat High Court on Tuesday rejected the bail application of Oreva Group MD Jaysukh Patel.

The backdrop to this fervent plea stems from the devastating events of October 30, 2022, when a suspension bridge over the Machchhu river crumbled, claiming the lives of 135 individuals from 122 families, including the loss of 32 innocent children. These grieving families, harboring deep reservations about the SIT’s integrity, have sought the court’s intervention to establish a new investigative team, dedicated to conducting an unbiased and transparent inquiry into the tragedy.

Expressing profound distrust in the current investigative efforts, petitioners argue that the existing probe appears inclined toward favoritism rather than an objective pursuit of justice. Key among their contentions is the alleged fabrication of witnesses, with over 350 individuals listed in the charge sheet, predominantly comprising relatives of the deceased victims, casting doubt on the credibility of the investigation.

Central to this sorrowful saga is the Oreva Group, entrusted with the responsibility of repairing and maintaining the ill-fated suspension bridge. The group, however, fell under scrutiny for allegedly hastening the bridge’s reopening for public use, merely six months into a projected 12-month repair timeline. Notably absent was the necessary technical certification and approval from the Nagarpalika, a glaring lapse that drew culpability toward Oreva Group’s MD, Jaysukh Patel.

Patel’s recent bid for bail faced rejection by the Gujarat High Court, as he stands accused of negligent handling, overseeing a deficient repair process, and prematurely allowing public access to the bridge sans requisite technical clearance.

During the court proceedings, victim’s advocate Rahul Sharma underscored the SIT report’s damning findings, emphasizing the inadequacy of the repair work undertaken by Oreva Group.

Sharma vehemently opposed Patel’s bail plea, citing the report’s assertion that the bridge’s technical repairs were superficial, devoid of genuine expertise, and conducted with the involvement of a fabricator lacking proper knowledge of suspension bridge technology.

As the legal proceedings unfold and victims’ families continue their impassioned pursuit of justice, the unresolved tragedy of the Morbi bridge collapse stands as a stark reminder of the irreplaceable loss suffered by numerous families, underscoring the pressing need for a thorough, impartial investigation into this heart-wrenching disaster.