Front Page   

Godhra carnage: forensic expert grilled

Special Correspondent

AHMEDABAD: Mukul Sinha, advocate for the Jansangharsha Manch, representing the communal riot victims before the G.T. Nanavati and K.G. Shah judicial inquiry commission probing the Godhra train carnage and the post-Godhra communal riots in Gujarat, on Wednesday grilled for more than three hours a senior scientist of the Forensic Science Laboratory who had claimed the “presence” of hydrocarbons in the fire in the ill-fated coach of the Sabarmati Express.

The cross-examination of D.B. Talati, assistant director (chemistry) of the FSL, was inconclusive and would be resumed on June 26.

On repeated questioning by Mr. Sinha, Mr Talati, who submitted to the commission a list of 47 charts and graphs of Gas Liquid Chromatography of the samples of materials collected from the ill-fated coach and outside the coach sent to the FSL by the police for examination, admitted that it was not possible to “detect” each component of hydrocarbons from the charts. He said at best the equipment used for preparing the graphs would only indicate a “group of components” of hydrocarbons present in the samples depending on the “retention time” of each component. He, however, later claimed that it was possible to identify the presence of the hydrocarbons through the “pattern of charts,” but would not indicate whether the materials used were burnt or unburned petrol.

Mr. Talati said the charts were prepared in “ISO Thermal Condition” through “packed column” method at a constant temperature of 150 degrees Centigrade, which he claimed was the “established standard procedure” for the detection of the presence of hydrocarbons.

Mr Talati’s cross-examination was crucial from the Manch’s point of view which disagrees with the State government’s theory of use of hydrocarbons to set fire to the coach and maintain that the fire was “accidental” or caused by some other reasons. The FSL submitted two sets of records and charts, the first in March, 2002, in two samples of which it claimed the presence of hydrocarbons, while another set of reports submitted on May 20, 2002, did not show any hydrocarbons.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Ready for second term if there is certainty, says Kalam
A new format
UNPA move unfortunate: Congress
“87 LTTE cadres killed in battles”
Kalam’s acceptance takes UNPA leaders by surprise
We want consensus, not confrontation, on industrialisation: Buddhadeb
EC warns of bypoll postponement
NDA fearful of being left in the lurch
Bush-Manmohan meeting in August?
PM: address challenges in power sector
Wimbledon, still the biggest prize in the game
Federer, Henin are top seeds; Paes-Damm pair seeded five
Step up engagement with ASEAN: Singapore
Pact on pipeline likely by mid-July
Godhra carnage: forensic expert grilled
No change in CPI(M) stand
“We don’t believe in containing any country”
China to build highway to Everest base camp
Row over American “strike” in Pakistan
U.K. Muslims shun knighthood row
‘Involve more nations in DCA’
Ford India launches upgraded Endeavour
Encroached land to be taken over in two weeks
BEML’s Rs. 450 cr. follow-on public issue
Nainavaram flyover in a year
Phone in shirt pocket? Must be an Indian
Huge package for Jindal plant
Impasse over power connection to apartment complexes may end
Solution in sight to Dera-Sikh row
Girl washed away in open nala
Better facilities for disabled at Egmore station
Bharathiar University to teach Chinese students English
Income limits
TRS chief says enough is enough
Plan to introduce energy audit
Emergency landings
More ATMs for eight railway stations
29 pilgrims hurt
MES for 50:50 seat sharing in its colleges
Suresh Kumar to resume work
Assembly session likely from July 16
Fresh apology
Selling non-converted farmland can land you in jail

Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu