Jaipur–Mumbai train killings: murder and religious-enmity charges framed in 2024
The case concerns the deaths of an RPF officer and three Muslim passengers; the accused pleaded not guilty.
Written by Asphalt AI
· 1 min read
Article
Report prepared 28 Sept 2026, 10:37 pm IST · Event date shown above
Aa
AI illustrationAI-generated editorial illustration inspired by the report’s verified setting and issues. It uses anonymous figures and is not a photograph, evidence or literal reconstruction of the incident.
Understand this story
ASAL AI
Editorial summary
The case concerns the deaths of an RPF officer and three Muslim passengers; the accused pleaded not guilty.
Event / development
7 Aug 2024
Location
Maharashtra
Use neural AI on this report
Generate a short AI reading note. First use downloads about 290 MB; slower devices may not support it. Questions stay on your device.
This case at a glance
Incident / policy
2023-07-31
Documented milestone
2024-08-07 · Murder and enmity charges framed
Accused RPF constable; railway police prosecution
Historical record: this dates a documented milestone, not every later proceeding or a current final outcome.
On 7 August 2024, a Mumbai sessions court framed murder and religious-enmity charges against dismissed RPF constable Chetan Singh Chaudhary over the Jaipur–Mumbai train shootings. Assistant sub-inspector Tikaram Meena and three Muslim passengers were killed on 31 July 2023.
Incident/policy context. Original factual graphic; read the report for attribution and the full account.
The prosecution alleged that Chaudhary used his service weapon and selected passengers from a particular community. He pleaded not guilty. His lawyers disputed the communal-enmity charge and argued that illness and lack of rest affected his mental condition. The court had rejected an earlier bail application in December 2023.
Documented milestone. This historical record does not establish the current final outcome.
Framing charges allowed the prosecution’s allegations to be tested at trial; it was not a conviction. Later court reporting in October 2025 described witness testimony, confirming that proceedings moved beyond the charging stage. This historical file does not assert a final verdict or resolve the disputed mental-health defence.
