Govt compares Godhra to 9/11, debunks flashover fire theory

Ahmedabad, Feb 9 (UNI) Drawing a parallel between the February 2002 Sabarmati Express carnage and the 2001 World Trade Center (WTC) terrorist attack, the Gujarat government today sought to prove before the Godhra Commission that the fire in the S6 coach of the train was the result of a ''deliberately planned attack'' and not an accident-trigerred ''flashover'' fire.

Government counsel Sunit Shah said just as in the 9/11 case, one could first see a lot of smoke emanating from the towers and in the Godhra carnage also, initially there was only smoke before fire engulfed the coach.

Making a presentation before the Nanavati-Shah Commission here, he said though the WTC towers were buildings and the S6 coach was part of a train, both were not air-tight chambers and therefore fire could spread naturally.

Refuting the ''flashover fire'' theory forwarded by the Jan Sangharsh Manch advocate Mukul Sinha, Mr Shah said for a flashover fire to break out, it required a confined space and a train compartment with so many outlets for leakage is not an ideal structure for a flash fire.

Mr Sinha in his earlier presentation had debunked the Government's contention that a huge quantity of inflammable liquid was used to set the coach on fire. ''It does not explain the smoke for almost 10 to 15 minutes,'' he had pointed out and had explained that it could have been an accidental flashover fire.

However, denouncing his contention, Mr Shah said, ''If the bogie had been airtight, with limited oxygen-rich air, open burning would have depleted the available oxygen. If there was sudden introduction of air, there would have been a smoke expulsion. But as the compartment was not airtight, there was no possibility of a flash fire.'' He argued that had it been a flashover fire, all exposed surfaces could have reached ignition temperatures more or less simultaneously. But the Forensic Science Laboratory report contended that the bogie had not been burnt equally or identically and this indicated that a flashfire had not occurred, he said.

He added that had there been a flashover fire, all persons would have been burnt to death.

Mr Shah pointed out several instances of witness accounts to prove that the fire had started from the rear side of the coach.

The Commission however asked him to elaborate on the sequence of events and explain the extent of damage caused by the fire to prove that the fire was not a flashover type.

The arguments of the Government counsel remained inconclusive today and will continue on February 22, the next date of hearing.

UNI