It is high time that authorities wake up to the stampedes occurring at pilgrimage centres and the senseless loss of human lives. Temple towns, across India, are thronged by lakhs of pilgrims every year. But rarely do these places possess the infrastructure that can support such heavy footfalls. In this scenario, the failure of authorities to maintain abundant caution and devise crowd mitigation strategies is the single biggest reason for the recurrent stampedes. The stampede on Tuesday at the Godavari Pushkaram in Rajahmundry in Andhra Pradesh in which over two dozen people have been killed, happened the same day that the Kumbh Mela commenced in Nashik. Of course, the preparations for the Kumbh are much better, but considering that an estimated 80 lakh people are expected to arrive in Nashik in the coming days, a state of high vigil must be maintained. It is worth remembering that in the 2013 Maha Kumbh, a mere rumour about a foot overbridge collapse at the Allahabad railway station culminated in a stampede and the death of 40 pilgrims. The Maharashtra government has set aside Rs2,500 crore and engaged nearly 15,000 people to oversee the Kumbh preparations. The Nashik district administration has promised a multi-pronged focus on security, water, power, transport and disaster management. But worries about infectious diseases have already surfaced in Nashik revealing the scale of the challenges faced by small cities coping with a sudden influx of people.

A crucial part of disaster and crowd management is identifying all possible threats, vulnerable locations, and regulating the flow of crowds. The stampede at Rajahmundry appears to have been triggered by the rush of pilgrims who pushed forward to bathe in the Godavari river. Last year’s stampede in Mumbai, before the funeral of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin, occurred when the mourners entered a narrow lane with the gates closed at the other end. The 2013 stampede at the Ratangarh temple in Madhya Pradesh’s Datia district leaving over 100 pilgrims dead, happened when pilgrims, estimated at five lakh, were proceeding through a 500-metre-long, ten-metre-wide bridge. The stampede was triggered by the frenzy set off by rumours about the bridge’s safety. The stampedes at Sabarimala in Kerala in 2011 and at the Naina Devi temple in Himachal Pradesh in 2008 were also triggered by poor crowd management techniques and the lack of enough security personnel to calm down the frenzied crowds.

It may be unrealistic to expect disciplined behaviour at such large gatherings. The responsibility for ensuring safety of the pilgrims, therefore, rests with officials in charge of the event. It is true that safety and health fears are not deterring many people from joining the swelling number of pilgrims to temple towns. Good sense would dictate that authorities then come up with ways to ensure that large crowds don’t concentrate in risk-prone areas, and that there are adequate numbers of entry and exit pathways. Under the Disaster Management Act, 2005, every district has a District Disaster Management Authority which brings together revenue, police, municipal officials and civil society groups under one umbrella. The recurrence and the geographic spread of temple stampedes also tell a story of civic apathy, and not just unpreparedness. Perhaps, the time has to come to view negligence on the part of the civil administration as a criminal offence. Even the civil tort liability for addressing claims against public officials for violation of fundamental rights and breach of statutory duty remains a grey area.

As a result, victims who take up cudgels seeking awarding of damages and holding state agencies responsible for accidents, stampedes, fires, electrocutions and building collapses, receive a raw deal from the courts. Unless the principle of command responsibility is enforced, the state of official apathy will not change.