comScore
  • Arrest warrant issued for Jaysukh Patel in connection with the collapse of the Morbi Bridge

    National
    Arrest warrant issued for Jaysukh Patel in connection with the collapse of the Morbi Bridge
    The arrest warrant was issued following Section 70 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC)...

    Digital Desk: A warrant was issued by a Gujarat Court for the arrest of Jaysukh Patel of Overa Group in connection with the Morbi bridge collapse, which cost 134 people. 

    According to reports, the contract to refurbish, repair, and operate the British-era Machchu River Bridge was awarded to Ajanta Manufacturing Limited (Oreva Group). 

    The arrest warrant was issued following Section 70 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). 

    "The court issued an arrest warrant against Jaysukh Patel of Overa Group, which had a contract for the reconstruction of the Morbi bridge," government prosecutor Sanjay Vora cited. He has been free for 70 days without being apprehended. There hasn't been a lookout warning issued yet."

    It should be noted that Patel had previously applied to Morbi court sessions on January 20 for anticipatory bail in the matter, but the hearing was postponed until February 1 due to the absence of the public prosecutor. 

    Furthermore, nine people have been arrested in the case so far, including four Oreva Group workers. 

    The arrested Oreva Group employees include two managers and an equal number of ticket-booking clerks who were in charge of the British-era bridge. 

    As many as 135 people, including women and children, were murdered and over 100 were injured when a cable suspension bridge in Morbi town fell last November, plummeting them into the Machchhu River.

    The Gujarat High Court took suo motu cognizance of the accident on November 7 and issued notices to officials, including those from the state Home department, requesting a report within a week. 

    Meanwhile, the Supreme Court ruled in November that the bridge collapse was a "enormous catastrophe," as it urged the Gujarat High Court, which was already hearing the case.