recent case study on earthquake in india

• Español (Spanish)
• Français (French)
• Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
• Brasil (Portuguese)
• India (English)
• हिंदी (Hindi)
• Feature Stories
• Explore All
• Subscribe page
• Submissions
• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Use
• Advertising
• Wild Madagascar
• Selva tropicales
• Mongabay.org
• Tropical Forest Network

A wake-up jolt? Assam’s 6.4 quake exposes its vulnerabilities

Share this article

If you liked this story, share it with other people.

• A 6.4 magnitude earthquake, measured on the Richter scale, rocked Assam in the early hours of April 28 this year. Two people died of shock and there was a lot of damage to property. There were at least 20 aftershocks.
• Soil liquefaction, when water seeps from the ground, was seen in places near the epicentre, near Dhekiajuli in the Sonitpur district.
• Scientists point that anthropogenic factors could contribute to earthquake triggers, although of smaller magnitude.
• More stringent monitoring of construction activities to ensure that the seismic code of safety is followed and awareness among people, are ways to mitigate the rising vulnerability of Assam as it lies in the highest seismic hazard zone.

When a strong, 6.4 magnitude earthquake shook Assam on April 28 this year, there was panic and mayhem. The earth cracked near the epicentre in the Sonitpur district, and so did walls and ceilings of people’s houses scores of miles in the radius; buildings swayed “like betel nut trees in the wind”, a hill broke down, and water seeped out of paddy fields. Already under the siege of the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, the earthquake — and the multiple aftershocks through the day — unleashed fear. Two people died of shock and there were several reports of considerable damage to houses and buildings. It also exposed, once again, the vulnerability of Assam to seismic activity and how anthropogenic activities could be further contributing to it.

Assam, and the entire northeast India, is categorised under seismic zone 5 , which means it’s extremely prone to high-intensity earthquakes. On April 28, the 6.4 magnitude earthquake measured on the Richter scale, was followed by 20 aftershocks of different magnitudes through the day, according to Gyanendra Dev Tripathi, CEO of Assam State Disaster Management Authority (ASDMA). Six aftershocks, of magnitude 3.2 to 4.7, occurred within hours of the main tremor. The National Centre for Seismology (NCS) has in fact continued to record seismic activity of magnitude 2.6-2.7 in the region on the eighth day of the main tremor.

The main tremor, said the NCS, occurred near the Kopili Fault, close to the Himalayan Frontal Thrust (HFT) which is a seismically very active area “associated with collisional tectonics where Indian plane sub-ducts beneath the Eurasian Plate”. A fault , according to the United States Geological Survey (USGS) “is a fracture or zone of fractures between two blocks of rocks. Faults allow the blocks to move relative to each other.” The Kopili fault is a 300 km northwest-southeast trending fault from the Bhutan Himalaya to the Burmese arc.

Earthquakes and Assam’s vulnerability

Earthquakes are not uncommon in Assam, with the NCS saying that the region has seen several moderate to high-intensity earthquakes. One of the worst among them was the great Assam-Tibet earthquake in 1950 which measured 8.6 magnitude on the Richter scale. Approximately 4,800 people were killed as a result, and there were several landslides that blocked the tributaries of the Brahmaputra and changed the topography of the region. The 1869 Cachar earthquake, measuring 7.4 magnitude, was another major seismic activity to hit the region.

Experts have said that recent seismicity discovered along the Kopili fault had led to speculations that it is one of the most seismically active faults of the region. A large portion of the Kopili fault region, said scientist Nilutpal Bora, and its neighbouring areas are characterised by alluvial soil that has a higher potential of trapping seismic waves and therefore making it one of the most earthquake-prone zones in northeast India.

“Assam, being located in the highest seismic zone, is perpetually challenged by the possibility of occurrence of earthquakes as an expression of release of accumulated tectonic stress,” Chandan Mahanta, professor in the department of civil engineering, Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Guwahati, told Mongabay-India. Continuous tectonic stress keeps building up along the fault lines, he said, and the 6.4 magnitude tremor was a release of such accumulated stress.

One thing leads to the other

High-intensity tremors aside, the region is vulnerable to seismic activity of different magnitude and intensity. This, said Mahanta, could be a contributing factor to erosion, since “seismic activity can disturb earth material properties, like strength and cohesion, and slope instability adds to this”.

Images of a portion of a hill breaking and falling into a river in the Udalguri district following the 6.4 magnitude tremor showcased to the rest of the world the intensity of the quake. The 1950 quake had led to many landslides and Mahanta said that apart from the major quakes mentioned, “many landslides are seismologically induced”. This means that seismic activity has a role to play in adding sediment load to the Brahmaputra river. “Landslides in upper Brahmaputra are known to add high sediment load to the river,” Mahanta said.

This is significant because a high sediment load on the Brahmaputra is known to cause recurrent floods since the river bed rises and the width of the river increases. Dredging of the river, the Assam government has long said, is a solution to this problem, allocating huge amounts of funds to this end. In 2017, union minister of transport, Nitin Gadkari, had announced Rs 250 crores for dredging the Brahmaputra. Experts, however, opine that dredging the entire river is neither a feasible nor a permanent solution since the silt makes its way back after being removed.

When water guzzled out of the earth

This April’s tremor also led to a seemingly ‘strange’ event: of water springing out of paddy fields, close to the epicentre, near Dhekiajuli, in Assam. A video of this was shared on social media by the present state chief minister Himanta Biswa Sarma. Scientists call this phenomenon, soil liquefaction. By definition, it means when saturated or partially saturated soil substantially loses strength and stiffness in response to applied stress, like the shake of an earthquake.

And in this case, Vineet Gahalaut, chief scientist, CSIR-National Geophysical Research Institute, said it was nothing out of the ordinary particularly because “it is common in places with shallow water table”.

“In 2017, the Manu earthquake in Tripura caused soil liquefaction till Bangladesh. And its magnitude was 5.7 on the Richter scale,” Gahalaut said.

Anthropogenic factors at play?

What should be considered more importantly, is the possibility of anthropogenic factors impacting seismic activity. “Whether anthropogenic factors can cause an earthquake of this magnitude (6.4) is difficult to establish. But there have been few cases in the US, where seismic monitoring is good, where it has been seen that anthropogenic factors may have caused small magnitude earthquake and seismic activity,” Gahalaut told Mongabay-India.

As an example, he said, excessive mining, geothermal pumps, construction of dams, and injecting water under high pressure in oil reserves to crack the area in order to release fluid and oil may “trigger” seismic activity. A research paper , ‘ Influence of anthropogenic groundwater unloading in Indo-Gangetic plains on the April 25, 2015 Mw 7.8 Nepal Earthquake ’—of which Gahalaut is a co-author—talks along similar lines.  “Tectonic process and anthropogenic factors are two very different things, but like the last straw on the camel’s back, when the pressure is already high and in a critical position, human activity can trigger an earthquake,” Gahalaut said.

Mitigating vulnerabilities

For northeast India and for Assam which is in the highest probability zone in terms of earthquake hazard, the vulnerability quotient is high and increasing. “Construction on hills, mushrooming high-rises increase the vulnerability factor,” Tripathi of ASDMA told Mongabay-India, “The way to mitigate this vulnerability is to ensure all construction follow the seismic code of safety and making people aware of safety measures,” he said.

Whether every building in Assam and in particular Guwahati — “especially the new ones,” said an expert — is following the code, however, is questionable.

“There is no strong supervisory mechanism or regulatory policy to ensure that this code is followed in all construction,” Tripathi said.

Mahanta suggests that “high-resolution, micro zonation-based planning and building design following the correct seismic code” is the key to building safety which is crucial in a place like Assam. A 2007 seismic microzonation atlas of Guwahati region is a case in point.

Interestingly, the tremor also brought into limelight the good-old, single-storeyed ‘Assam-type’ houses which were built with indigenous material and were more capable of resisting earthquakes. Fast disappearing from urban areas, the jolt has revved up nostalgia on social media and has spurred conversations around the restoration of such ancestral houses.

Banner image: Seismic activity has a role to play in adding sediment load to the Brahmaputra river. Photo by VINOYBLOG/Wikimedia Commons.

Climate Innovations

A Jharkhand farmer uses AI and technology to modernise farming

Polluting leather industry adopts sustainable practices to reduce environmental footprint

Brick kilns embrace zigzag design to cut pollution and boost efficiency

Innovating with deadstock: From dump yards to designer racks

If the Green Revolution rode on the strength of chemicals derived mainly from fossil fuels, now there is a shift in the thinking on how agriculture is being done in India, with a thrust on growing indigenous crop varieties and following natural farming practices. In the industrial sector, with initiatives such as ‘Make in India’, […]

Free and open access to credible information

Latest articles.

Desilting tanks for improving water security and soil health

Lesser adjutants thrive in a Jharkhand district, finds study

Urban expansion drives forest loss in India’s biodiversity hotspots

Your Environment This Week: AI and farming, Conference of Panchayats

Amid the global green goods boom, India is yet to jump on the bandwagon

[Commentary] Kerala is a hotspot within a hotspot

Pollution dips, but fine particulate matter remains top public health threat: AQLI report

Addressing climate vulnerabilities in a conference of panchayats

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center

• What are the oldest known civilizations of India?
• What are the major holidays and festivals of India?
• Why is an earthquake dangerous?
• What are earthquake waves?
• How is earthquake magnitude measured?

Bhuj earthquake of 2001

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur - Effects of Local Geology on damage severity during Bhuj, India Earthquake
• World Institute of Disaster Risk Management Library - The Bhuj Earthquake
• CORE - 2001 Bhuj-Kachchh earthquake: surface faulting and its relation with neotectonics and regional structures, Gujarat, Western India
• NASA - Earth Observatory - Liquefaction Effects from the Bhuj Earthquake
• Indian Academy of Sciences - An eyewitness account of the Bhuj earthquake
• Academia - The 2001 Kutch (Bhuj) earthquake: Coseismic surface features and their significance

Bhuj earthquake of 2001 , massive earthquake that occurred on Jan. 26, 2001, in the Indian state of Gujarat , on the Pakistani border.

The earthquake struck near the town of Bhuj on the morning of India ’s annual Republic Day (celebrating the creation of the Republic of India in 1950), and it was felt throughout much of northwestern India and parts of Pakistan . The moment magnitude of the quake was 7.7 (6.9 on the Richter scale ). In addition to killing more than 20,000 people and injuring more than 150,000 others, the quake left hundreds of thousands homeless and destroyed or damaged more than a million buildings. A large majority of the local crops were ruined as well. Many people were still living in makeshift shelters a year later.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 05 July 2021

A holistic seismotectonic model of Delhi region

• Brijesh K. Bansal 1 , 2 ,
• Kapil Mohan 1 ,
• Mithila Verma 2 &
• Anup K. Sutar 3  

Scientific Reports volume  11 , Article number:  13818 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

3327 Accesses

8 Citations

10 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Solid Earth sciences

Delhi region in northern India experiences frequent shaking due to both far-field and near-field earthquakes from the Himalayan and local sources, respectively. The recent M3.5 and M3.4 earthquakes of 12th April 2020 and 10th May 2020 respectively in northeast Delhi and M4.4 earthquake of 29th May 2020 near Rohtak (~ 50 km west of Delhi), followed by more than a dozen aftershocks, created panic in this densely populated habitat. The past seismic history and the current activity emphasize the need to revisit the subsurface structural setting and its association with the seismicity of the region. Fault plane solutions are determined using data collected from a dense network in Delhi region. The strain energy released in the last two decades is also estimated to understand the subsurface structural environment. Based on fault plane solutions, together with information obtained from strain energy estimates and the available geophysical and geological studies, it is inferred that the Delhi region is sitting on two contrasting structural environments: reverse faulting in the west and normal faulting in the east, separated by the NE-SW trending Delhi Hardwar Ridge/Mahendragarh-Dehradun Fault (DHR-MDF). The WNW-ESE trending Delhi Sargoda Ridge (DSR), which intersects DHR-MDF in the west, is inferred as a thrust fault. The transfer of stress from the interaction zone of DHR-MDF and DSR to nearby smaller faults could further contribute to the scattered shallow seismicity in Delhi region.

Similar content being viewed by others

3D architecture and complex behavior along the simple central San Andreas fault

Complex trans-ridge normal faults controlling large earthquakes

Complex strike-slip faulting during the 2021 M w 7.4 Maduo earthquake

Introduction.

The National Capital Territory (NCT) of Delhi is located about 250 km away from the seismically active Himalayan collision zone and experiences shaking frequently from far field and near field earthquakes. Delhi is placed in seismic zone IV in the seismic zoning map of India (IS 1893, Part1: 2016) (Fig.  1 a). This intraplate region is exposed to moderate to high risk due to Himalayan earthquakes, e.g., Mw 7.5 Garhwal Himalaya in 1803 (1803 GH), Mw 6.8 Uttarkashi earthquake in 1991 (1991 UKS), Mw 6.6 Chamoli earthquake in 1999 (1999 CHM), Mw 7.8 Gorkha earthquake in 2015 (2015 GRK) (Fig.  1 a) and a few moderate earthquakes from the Hindukush region as well as local earthquakes, e.g., M 6.5 Delhi earthquake in 1720, M5.0 Mathura earthquake in 1842, M 6.7 Bulandshahar earthquake in 1956 and M5.8 Moradabad earthquake in 1966 (Fig.  1 b).

( a ) Seismicity of Himalaya (magnitude ≥ 4.5 from 01.01.1900 to 10.06.2020) taken from USGS and overlapped on SRTM data of 90 m resolution ( http://srtm.csi.cgiar.org ). The Ganga basin area is shown with a black rectangle. The red rectangle represents Delhi and surroundings. ( b ) the structure of the basement of the Ganga Basin based on Fuloria1 and Sastri et al.2 overlapped with the epicenter of earthquakes of Delhi region. The figure is prepared using Generic Mapping Tools version 4.4.0 3 .

Delhi is one of the largest cities of the country and habitat for ~ 20 million people. It is a socio-economic hub with a wide spectrum of dwellings, from low-income people with poor constructions to very large buildings and infrastructure representing the rapidly growing economy. The seismic activity in Delhi and surroundings has been a cause for concern to the public and also it caused damage to infrastructure from time to time. Recognizing the high-risk potential, a seismic monitoring and hazard evaluation program was initiated for the Delhi region about two decades ago. The continuous monitoring with progressively upgraded network provides new insights into the spatial-depth distribution and source mechanisms.

The existing studies of Delhi Region suggest two contradictory subsurface structural trends: (i) thrust/reverse fault with strike-slip component 4 and (ii) normal fault with strike-slip component 5 , 6 (Supplementary Table 1) . However, in absence or with limited subsurface geophysical information, the focal mechanisms and depth distribution of earthquakes prove to be helpful to guide identification of seismogenic structures/faults.

Recently, three earthquakes occurred in Delhi region (12 April 2020 of M3.5, 10 May 2020 of M3.4 and 29th May 2020 of M4.4), which have been recorded by a dense local network of 15 seismic stations. Taking advantage of the availability of good quality of recorded data, the faulting mechanisms of these moderate events along with two past events (01st June 2017 of M 4.2 and 29th May 2011 of M3.4) are determined for re-examination of structural trends. A comprehensive appraisal (seismological and geophysical) has also been conducted to probe linkages within local geological structures of the region and to propose a holistic seismotectonic model.

Geology and tectonic setting of Delhi region

The Ganga basin, with an area of about 250,000 sq km falls within Long. 77° E–88° E and Lat. 24° N–30° N (Fig.  1 b). It is located between the northern fringe of the Indian peninsula and the Himalaya and extends from Delhi-Hardwar Ridge (DHR) in the west to Munger-Saharsa ridge in the east (Fig.  1 a,b). Delhi is located near the northern fringe of the Proterozoic Aravalli-Delhi fold belt and western edge of the Ganga basin (Fig.  1 b).

The terrain is generally flat except for a low NNE-SSW trending Delhi Hardwar ridge in the southern and central part of the area which consists of Quartzite while the Quaternary sediments, comprising the older and newer alluvium, cover the rest of the area. The thickness of the alluvium, both on the eastern and western side of the ridge, is variable but west of the ridge it is generally thicker (290 m).

The thick deposits of soft sediments of Yamuna plains plays a dominant role in ground motion amplification as experienced during past earthquakes 7 .

Historically, studies of the Himalayan foot-hills belt were initially conducted by Medlicott 8 , Theobald 9 , Oldham 10 , and Middlemiss 11 . Later, Wadia 12 and Auden 13 and several other officers of the Geological Survey of India mapped different parts of this belt. Agocs 14 provided the first geophysical (aeromagnetic) data for the sedimentary thickness and configuration of the basement in the Indo-Gangetic plains. Krishnan and Swaminath 15 proposed that the great Vindhyan basin must be extended into the Lesser Himalayan region. Sengupta 16 using the aeromagnetic data subdivided the Ganga basin into four parts separated by basement ridges or faults or both (Fig.  1 b). Based on a re-interpretation of earlier gravity data, Sengupta 17 (1964) correlated the evolution of the Himalaya with the subcrustal movements below the Gangetic plains. The Oil and Natural Gas Commission, based on geophysical surveys (aeromagnetic, gravity, and seismic) and drilling data, in 1968 identified the three ridges in the Ganga basin named (from east to west) as Munger-Saharsa ridge, Faizabad ridge and Delhi-Hardwar Ridge (DHR) (Fig.  1 b). Valdiya 18 correlated the transverse structures in the Himalaya to these three hidden basement ridges. The western boundary of the Ganga basin is delineated by DHR and the eastern margin by the northeastward continuation of the buried basement ridge (Munger-Saharsa ridge) 2 . The DHR was proposed with the least areal extent (6000 sq km) among all three ridges. Sastri et al. 2 and Karunakaran and Ranga Rao 19 described the shallow character of the DHR. The ridge was not traced with seismic survey beyond Meerut; ‘the trend is probably obscured by a thick Neogene cover’ 6 .

Based on magnetic survey, Arora et al. 20 proposed a major conductive structure, namely, the Trans Himalayan conductor (THC), that strikes perpendicular to the Ganga basin into the foothills of the Himalaya and located east of Delhi (Fig.  2 ). Later, through a magnetic survey, Arora and Mahashabde 21 characterized the THC as a major electrical conductive structure (having a resistivity of 2 Ohm.m) with a width of 45 km and depth of 15 km following the strike of the Aravalli range and running into the Himalaya (Fig.  2 ).

Tectonic map of the Delhi region with the Trans- Himalayan Conductor (THC) superimposed on it. The earthquakes with magnitude M > 3.0 from 2001 to 10th June 2020 are plotted (stars) from the earthquake catalog prepared by NCS, New Delhi. Major tectonic features of the Himalaya; Main Boundary Thrust (MBT), Main Central Thrust (MCT) and Main Frontal Thrust (MFT) are shown along with the regional tectonic features including Mahendragarh–Dehradun Fault (MDF), Delhi–Hardwar Ridge (DHR), Moradabad Fault (MF), Sohna Fault (SF), Mathura Fault (MTF) and Great Boundary Fault (GBF). The fault plane solutions of the four past earthquakes are shown with black & white beach balls prepared from and the recent (12th April 2020, 10th May 2020 and 29th May 2020) earthquakes are shown with red & white beach balls. The stations used for computation of fault plane solutions are shown with black triangles and station numbers (1:NDI; 2:NRLA; 3: LDR; 4:JMIU; 5:BISR; 6:AYAN; 7:UJWA; 8:JHJR; 9:SONA; 10:KUDL). The tectonic features are from the files provided at BHUKOSH portal of Geological Survey of India ( http://bhukosh.gsi.gov.in/Bhukosh/MapViewer.aspx ). These features are overlapped on SRTM data of 90 m resolution ( http://srtm.csi.cgiar.org ). The figure is prepared using Generic Mapping Tools version 4.4.0 3 .

Mallick et al. 22 , following the study of Raiverman et al. 23 , have suggested a deep-seated fault along the course of the Yamuna River formed by the flexure of the Indian Plate due to subduction beneath the Himalaya. Valdiya 24 and Chandra 25 have also indicated a fault zone along the strike of Aravallis in this area. By correlating seismicity with the changes in the Coulomb stress, Arora et al. 26 proposed along-strike segmentation of NW Himalaya, controlled by the subsurface ridges (underthrusting the Indian Plate) and by rift and nappe structures. They suggested the episodic reactivation of Delhi-Hardwar Ridge due to the strains resulting from the locking of Indian-Eurasian Plates as proposed by Arora 27 .

Dubey et al. 28 inferred three NW–SE trending reverse faults in the Delhi region using Remote Sensing, Ground-Penetrating Radar (GPR), and Bouguer gravity anomaly data. However, due to very limited depth of penetration of GPR survey (a few meters), modern geophysical surveys with a higher depth of penetration (e.g., Magnetotellurics / Seismic) are imminent to verify and precise characterization of these faults. Dubey et al. 28 have also suggested that earthquakes that occurred near Rohtak and have orientation other than MDF (i.e. NE-SW) might be related to lithospheric crustal loading of the Himalaya orogeny on the Delhi-Sargoda Ridge. Based on the gravity and aeromagnetic investigations, GSI 29 proposed a NE-SW trending, 295 km long fault linking Indian peninsular craton in the south to Himalayan Frontal Thrust (HFT) in the north along the DHR and named it as MDF. At the junction of MDF and HFT, Jade 30 estimated the convergence rate of 10–18 mm/year between India and Tibet. The information on slip rates along major faults of Delhi region is not available. Patel et al. 31 delineated the shallow steep vertical faults near MDF (though MDF was not traced) using GPR survey and suggested MDF as a normal fault system at shallow subsurface and showing normal with oblique-slip motion.

Ravi Kumar et al. 32 published the Bouguer anomaly map of North India including the Ganga basin using well-controlled ground data and inferred that the Aravalli Delhi Mobile Belt (ADMB) and its marginal faults extend to the Western Himalayan front via Delhi where it interacts with the Delhi–Lahore ridge and further north with the Himalayan front causing seismic activity. Godin and Harris 33 , using Bouger gravity data of Delhi region derived from Earth Gravitational Model (EGM) 2008 have suggested that NE Delhi–Hardwar trend continues northeastward across the surface trace of the Main Frontal Thrust to the Karakoram fault. They further suggested that the DHR is delimited by the Shimla and Dehradun lineaments and proposed it as a horst with steeply-dipping normal faults on either side (Fig.  3 ). The Dehradun lineament connects the eastern edge of the Delhi–Hardwar Ridge to the Burang graben north of Shimla, the westernmost N–S graben of southern Tibet.

Bouguer gravity map (in Gal) of Delhi region with lineament interpretation and dip directions (modified after Goddin and Harris 39 Harris 33 ).

Dwivedi et al. 34 , through 3D structural inversion of gravity data (from Gravity Map (WGM)-2012 and gravity map series of India-2006 (GSI-NGRI, 2006)), speculated that NE trending Delhi Fold Belt deflected westward towards the shallower DSR and produce clustered seismicity in the hinge zone of this crustal bending near the Delhi region. They suggested that it is happening due to development of high strain resulting from crustal buckling of Delhi Fold Belt and DSR. They opined that the structural setup possibly developed after NW corner indentation and anti-clockwise rotation of Indian plate (post-Eocene collision) (as proposed by Voo et al. 35 ) led to the westward deflection of NE trending Delhi Fold Belt. In addition to geophysical and geological studies, the seismological studies have a special contribution in understanding the subsurface structures and seismotectonics of the region.

Seismic monitoring in Delhi region

Among the far-field moderate to large earthquakes (1803 GK, 1991 UKS, 1999 CHM, 2015 GRK) experienced in the Delhi region from Himalayan sources, the earthquake of 1st September 1803 (1803 GH) is considered to be important as damage was observed in Delhi and its surrounding region. Different locations were proposed for this earthquake. Initially, this earthquake was considered as the 1803 Mathura earthquake (M 6.8) 10 , 36 , 37 . Later, it was studied in detail 38 , 39 and suggested renaming the event as the 1803 Garhwal earthquake.

As mentioned in the preceding section, the Delhi region has also experienced near-field earthquakes from the local sources [Historical earthquake of Delhi (M6.5, 1720); Bulandshahar earthquake (M 6.7, 1956); and Gurgaon earthquake (M 4.8, 1960)] (locations given in Fig.  1 b and Supplementary Table 2). The intensity of the 1720 Delhi earthquake was assessed as IX in the Old Delhi area. Though the exact epicenter of this event is uncertain; it was in the vicinity of Delhi 40 . The 1956 Bulandshahar earthquake was felt over a larger area and deaths as well as destruction to property were reported. The 1960 Gurgaon earthquake (M4.8) is the closest instrumentally located event to the Delhi region, though the location and magnitude were debated (Supplementary Table 2).

Seismic instrumentation in the Delhi region started in 1960 by India Meteorological Department (IMD) and initially, an analog seismological observatory was installed at Delhi Ridge. This observatory was later upgraded to the World-Wide Standardized Seismograph Network (WWSSN) standard in 1963 41 . The seismograph installed at the observatory recorded a large number of microtremors including, those originated from Sonipat area (about 50 km NW of Delhi) (Fig.  2 ) during the swarm activity of the Sonipat-Rohtak area (NW of Delhi) in 1963–65. The seismicity during swarm activity of 1963–65 was found to be concentrated in three clusters, namely, west of Delhi, near Sonipat, and close to Rohtak 42 , 43 . An analog observatory was established at Lodi Road area in the southern part of Delhi (Fig.  2 , given with label no. 3 having code LDR) in 1964. Later, in 1974, analog seismological observatories were installed at three other locations, Rohtak, Sohna and Meerut adjoining Delhi. On 28 July 1994, an event of magnitude M4.0 was recorded in Delhi and reported to have caused damage to one of the minarets of Jama Masjid 44 . In year 2000–2001, 16 stations (12 stations with single component and four stations with three-component seismographs) VSAT based Digital Seismic Telemetry Network was established for close monitoring of earthquake activity in Delhi region. Nine field stations in Digital Seismic Telemetry Network were deployed within a radius of 80 km of Delhi. The two earthquakes of magnitudes M4.0 and M3.8 that occurred on 28.02.2001 and 28.04.2001, respectively, in Delhi region were recorded by the DTSN.

The second swarm activity in the Jind area (~ 80 km NW of Sonipat and ~ 130 km NW to Delhi (Fig.  2 ) occurred during the period December 2003–January 2004 and observed in two clusters. This swarm activity was characterized by 152 tremors, out of which 62 events were of magnitude (ML) range 0.5–3.4 45 . Shukla et al. 46 correlated the seismicity clusters with the NW–SE trending Delhi Sargoda ridge (DSR).

All the 16 stations of Delhi Seismic Telemetry Network were upgraded, and 9 new stations were installed during 2015–2018 in and around Delhi. These stations are equipped with VSAT for receiving data in real time at the National Center for Seismology (NCS), New Delhi. Presently these stations are integrated with the National Seismological Network, which is now a state-of- the-art network with 115 broadband, three-component seismographs spread across the entire country and has real-time data reception from field stations to Central Receiving Station (CRS) in New Delhi. The data are analyzed in CRS and the information is disseminated for follow-up actions.

From the analysis of past data, it is observed that 122 earthquakes of magnitude M ≥ 3.0 including, eight earthquakes with magnitude M ≥ 4 (with the largest earthquake of M4.9 on 05th March 2012) occurred in Delhi region during January-2001 to 10thJune 2020 (Supplementary Fig. 1a). The depth distribution of the events is shown in Supplementary Fig. 1b. Focal depths generally lie within 15 km from the surface (with a depth uncertainty of ~ 2–4 km) with only about 10% events being deeper than 15 km (Supplementary Fig. 1b). In recent years, M4.9 March 2012, M4.6 September 2016, and M4.6, June 2017 earthquakes are the significant local earthquakes recorded in the Delhi region.

Richter 47 , studied the seismotectonics of the Delhi region and suggested that the region east of Delhi may be associated with the block faulting. Chouhan 42 studied the seismicity of Delhi using 74 earthquakes of magnitude ≥ 2.0 (for a period between 1962 to 1972) and suggested that most of the seismically active areas lie at the junction of Delhi-Hardwar Ridge, the Lahore-Delhi ridge (DSR) and the axis of Delhi Fold Belt. Molnar et al. 4 studied the 10th October 1956 Bulandshahr earthquake (located east of DHR) and suggested the fault plane solution as normal faulting focal mechanism. Chouhan 42 has also estimated the fault plane solution of October 10, 1956, and August 15, 1966, earthquakes occurred near Bulandsahar and Moradabad, respectively (both falls in the east to DHR) and suggested a steep dip, strike-slip with small normal component faulting.

Shukla et al. 46 used first-motion data recorded by the Delhi Telemetry Seismic Network (between 2001–2004) to determine the focal mechanism of small 19 local earthquakes and suggested the thrust with the strike-slip focal mechanism. They also associated seven earthquakes with MDF and proposed a reverse fault mechanism on a steeply dipping plane (Dip 60 o to 85°). They further proposed MDF as a strike-slip fault and reactivated as “thrust” with strike-slip component ‘in the imparted tectonic domain of back thrust’. The statement seems contradictory as the fault plane solution estimated by them suggested a steep dip (of 64 o to 85°).

Bansal et al. 5 estimated the source characteristics (including depth and focal mechanism) of the two earthquakes (28th April 2001 and 18th March 2004) in Delhi and provided valuable new information. The focal mechanism of the earthquakes have shown normal faulting with a large strike-slip component (having Dip of 64 o to 85°) (Fig.  2 ) with one of the nodal planes in NE–SW direction. Singh et al. 6 also analyzed the 25th November 2007 (Mw 4.1) earthquake in detail and given the strike-slip faulting with some normal component mechanism (having dip of 55° to 86°) (Fig.  2 ). Shukla et al. 46 used 6 to 10 first motions for estimating the focal mechanism of small-magnitude earthquakes which are insufficient/ and are often difficult to read and focal mechanisms may not be well-constrained 5 . Though Singh et al. 6 emphasized that the focal mechanism estimated by Bansal et al. 5 through well recorded data from Digital Strong Motion Network of Central Building Research Institute, Roorkee is reliable.

Fault plane solutions and structural trends

Recently, three earthquakes occurred on 12th April, 10th May and 29th May 2020 were recorded by the more than 22 stations of the National Seismological Network (NSN), distributed in the northern part of India. The fault plane solution (FPS) of the event of 12thApril 2020 event has been estimated by Pandey et al. 48 . The NSN has also reported two more earthquakes of M>3.0 on 29th May 2011 and 01st June 2017. The fault plane solutions of these four events (29th May 2011, 01st June 2017, 10th May 2020 and 29th May 2020) are determined in the present work using the ISOLA software package 49 and given in Table 1 along with the FPS of 12th April 2020 determined by Pandey et al. 48 . Only those stations with cut-off signal to noise ratio >2 in the frequency range of interest are used for estimation of fault plane solutions of these events (Fig. 2 ). The computational details are given in Supplementary data.

The FPS of 12th April 2020 shows two nodal planes striking at 13° and 253° with a dip of 55° each. The two nodal planes show rake of -135 (normal right lateral oblique) and -45 (normal left-lateral oblique) with dominant normal fault mechanism (Table 1 ). The FPS of 10th May 2020 shows two nodal planes striking 32° and 275° with a dip of 75° and 31 o each. The two nodal planes show rake of -117 (normal right lateral oblique) and -31 (normal left-lateral oblique) with dominant normal fault mechanism (Table 1 ). The second nodal planes of both these earthquakes have suggested the strike of 253° and 275° (Table 1 ), respectively, which are not consistent with either the trend of Aravalli belt (NNE-SSW) or with the trend of major fault lines (NNE-SSW to N-S) in the region (Fig.  2 ). Therefore, the nodal planes with strikes of 13° and 32° that are consistent with the Aravalli and major tectonic trends and are considered.

The FPS of 29th May 2020 shows two nodal planes striking at 10° and 124° with a dip of 37° and 73 o each. The two nodal planes show rake of -123 (normal right lateral oblique) and -29 (normal left-lateral oblique) with dominant normal fault mechanism (Table 1 ). Both of the fault plane solutions have suggested a causative fault trending NNE-SSW direction with a steep dip to the NE. The earthquake of 29th May 2020 which occurred ~ 34 km west of the India Gate area of New Delhi (or ~ 18 km east of Rohtak) falls close to MDF.

The FPS of 29th May 2011 shows two nodal planes striking at 236° and 52° with a dip of 41 o and 50 o each. The two nodal planes show rake of 94 (reverse) and 87 (reverse) with dominant reverse fault mechanism (Table 1 ). The FPS of 01st June 2017 shows two nodal planes striking at 264° and 171° with a dip of 83 o and 59 o each. The two nodal planes show rake of 31 (reverse left-lateral oblique) and 172 (right-lateral strike-slip) with dominant reverse fault mechanism (Table 1 ). Both these earthquakes (29th May 2011 and 01st June 2017) were located close to DSR (~18 km and ~07 km west of MDF, respectively).

An earthquake of magnitude M4.9 was occurred on 5th March 2012 about 20 km south-west of this earthquake. Bansal and Verma 50 proposed a strike of N348 o and a dip of 48° with a rake of 131° (strike slip motion with reverse component) for this earthquake. The earthquake was located ~ 4 km west of the MDF. The estimated fault plane solution has suggested a NNW-SSE trending reverse fault; therefore, it may not be strictly associated with the MDF. Therefore, it is inferred that the earthquakes occurring to the east of DHR/MDF are following the normal with strike slip mechanism and the earthquakes located to the west of DHR/MDF follows the reverse with strike-slip mechanism.

Further, the earthquakes of 12th April 2020 and 10th May 2020 are located to the east of the DHR and south-western edge of the Trans Himalayan Conductor (THC) proposed by Arora et al. 19 (Fig.  2 ). FPS of both the recent earthquakes have shown strike of NNE and steep dip of 55°-75° that are commensurate with the geometry of the edge of THC (Fig.  2 ). The depth of ~ 15 km has been estimated for both these events. Therefore, both the recent earthquakes (12th April 2020 and 10th May 2020) might be nucleated at the southwestern edge of the THC.

Distribution of strain energy in Delhi region

The energy is a direct indicator of the size of an earthquake and estimation of the accumulated energy in a region can provide valuable information regarding the potential seismic hazard of the region. The spatial variation of energy release can provide information on the potential locales of stress accumulation in a region in the absence of geodetic data. Similarly, the temporal variation of seismic energy of a region can provide the different stages of energy release process 42 , 51 and could be used as a long-term earthquake precursor. In the present study, the spatial distribution of strain energy has been estimated for Delhi and the surrounding areas based on the earthquake catalog of the region for the period 1998-2020 taken from the website of National Centre for Seismology ( https://seismo.gov.in/content/seismological-data ). Earthquakes with magnitude range between M0.8 and M5.1 have been considered. The computational details are given in Supplementary material.

The spatial distribution of strain energy estimated in the Delhi region has been shown in Fig. 4 . The maximum energy, in the range of 08*10 11 Joule has been released in this period in the Delhi region. The energy is released mainly in two areas, (i) the area west of DHR/MDF, and (ii) the area east of the DHR (central and NW Delhi). Almost twice the amount of energy has been released in the western part (at the contact zone of DHR and DSR), compared to the eastern part (east of DHR).

Distribution of estimated seismic energy release from earthquakes during 1998-April 2020 in the Delhi region considering a 0.3° × 0.3° grid. The tectonic features are from the files provided at BHUKOSH portal of the Geological Survey of India ( http://bhukosh.gsi.gov.in/Bhukosh/MapViewer.aspx ).

During an earthquake, the normal faulting is caused by the gravitational potential, however in case of reverse and strike slip fault, the energy is accumulated as elastic potential. The rocks get deformed under compression, are characterized by yield stresses about 10 times larger than yield stresses in tensional stress fields 52 . Additionally, reverse faults need more energy to move the rocks as compared to thrust in case of reverse fault, the hanging wall moves against gravity. Therefore, the energy dissipation in reverse fault is always more than the thrust and normal faulting. In Delhi region we infer the reverse faulting in the western part of DHR-MDF and normal faulting in the eastern part.

Proposed seismotectonic model

In general understanding, a seismotectonic model suggests the correlation of seismicity with the fault lines of the area and the slip rates along these faults. Delhi area is, however, under-represented in geodetic studies as the GPS network is to be established and no study on Active fault mapping is available along the major faults to confirm slip/slip rates. Taking advantage of the quality data generated by the local seismological network, we propose a seismotectonic model of the Delhi region through the integration of seismicity characteristics, the associated structural features and the estimates of strain energy released in the region. From subsurface structural appraisal, it is inferred that the MDF/DHR follows the trend of Aravalli Delhi Mobile Belt and is a NE-SW trending horst structure with steep normal faulting that continues northeastward across the surface trace of the Main Frontal Thrust to the Karakoram fault. The past seismological studies 4 , 5 , 6 , 5 have also suggested normal with a strike-slip focal mechanism in the area east of DHR/ MDF. The focal mechanisms of three recent earthquakes (M 3.5, 12th April 2020 and M3.4, 10th May 2020 and M 4.4, 29th May 2020) to the east of DHR/MDF have also shown normal with strike-slip focal mechanism. The energy released in the last two decades also indicates a similar focal mechanism. Shukla 46 through FPS of 10 earthquakes (of 2001–2004, with single component seismographs) and Bansal and Verma 51 through FPS of 01 earthquake recorded with digital strong motion data have suggested DSR, bounded by reverse fault/thrust is an NW–SE trending structure. The fault plane solutions of the two earthquakes (29th May 2011 and 01st June 2017) fallen close to DSR have also shown reverse/thrust faulting with strike slip mechanism. The DSR appears to interact with the DHR in the west of Delhi (Fig.  5 a,c). The interaction zone of DHR/MDF and DSR is seismically most active in last two decades (Fig.  2 ). The scattered and mostly shallow focus seismic activity in the region is inferred to be associated with the presence of faults that got activated time and again due to transfer of stress from the interaction zone of DHR-MDF and DSR. The seismotectonic constraints are presented in the form of a model in Fig.  5 .

( a ) Proposed earthquake mechanism model (unscaled)of the Delhi region, ( b ) planer close view of the earthquake process and ( c ) east facing view of the earthquake process of the Delhi region. DSR Delhi Sargoda Ridge, MDF Mahendragarh-Dehradun Fault, and DHR Delhi Hardwar Ridge. The black and white beach balls correspond to past earthquakes and red & white beach balls show the mechanisms of the recent earthquakes of 12th April 2020 and 10th May 2020.

We have also examined the possibility of THC as the causative structure of two recent earthquakes, M3.5, 12th April 2020 and M3.4, 10th May 2020. Due to high conductivity, the THC might be filled with mantle derived fluid and is ductile in nature. Hence it may not allow large accumulation of strain. Therefore, the strain can be accumulated on both lateral edges of the THC (Fig.  2 ). Since the FPS of two recent earthquakes (of M3.5, 12th April 2020 and M3.4, 10th May 2020) has shown strike of 13–32°, i.e., NNE, and steep dip of 55°-75 o to the NE, we reject the possibility of THC as a causative structure in those cases.

Discussion and conclusions

The densely populated, socio-economically important, housing national capital, the Delhi region has been experiencing earthquakes from both regional (Himalayan) and local sources. The seismicity due to local earthquakes, although not associated with significant damage to property, has created panic among the public in the epicentral areas. The estimation of focal mechanism of recently occurred earthquakes of 12th April 2020 (M3.5) and 10th May 2020, (M3.4) and 29th May 2020 (M4.4), the spatial distribution of energy in the Delhi region in last two decades and appraisal of local sources (geological, geophysical, and seismological) have been integrated to understand the causative structural sources and mechanism of seismicity in the Delhi region. The fault plane solutions of these three earthquakes have suggested a nodal plane trending NNE-SSW direction with a steep dip of 37° to 75° in the NE direction and normal with strike-slip mechanism.

Our analysis on appraisal of subsurface structures of the region suggests three probable major earthquake mechanisms in the Delhi region: (i) episodic reactivation of DHR due to the strains resulting from the locking of Indian-Eurasian plate, (ii) lithospheric crustal loading of the Himalayan orogen on the Delhi-Sargoda Ridge, (iii) interaction of Aravalli Delhi Mobile Belt with Delhi–Lahore Ridge and further north with the Himalayan front.

Since the year 2000, low level seismicity has been observed in the northern part of the Delhi within the zone of interaction of DHR and Himalayan Frontal Thrust. Therefore, the seismic potential of minor to moderate earthquakes cannot be ruled out due to transfer of stress from the intersection zone (of DHR and Himalayan Frontal Thrust) through DHR. A simplified subsurface mechanism of seismicity in the Delhi region has also been proposed in the current study. We believe that the proposed seismotectonic model will serve as a starting model for future studies. NCS has already planned to enhance the local seismic network in the region to help in precise location of smaller events and constraining their focal depths accurately. Also, other investigations such as active fault mapping and subsurface imaging, which are in pipeline would help in refining and strengthening the proposed model.

The seismological investigations, energy estimation and appraisal of subsurface structures have led to the following major results: (i) Two major ridges (DHR and DSR) are interacting in the west of Delhi NCT; DSR is bounded by thrust/ reverse faulting and DHR is a steep horst structure associated with normal faulting, (ii) The earthquake in the Delhi region have occurred in two major clusters in last two decades; each is located west and east to DHR/ MDF, (iii) Higher seismic energy (almost two times) has been released in the western cluster located west to Delhi as compared to eastern cluster, (iv) two major structural/ fault mechanisms in the region have been recognized-thrust/ reverse with strike slip mechanism in the western part and normal with strike slip mechanism in the eastern part due to the presence of DHR/ MDF associated with steep normal faulting in the east and presence of DSR bounded by thrust in the west, respectively, and (v) The scattered shallow seismicity in the region is inferred to be due to stress transfer from interaction zone of two ridges (DHR and DSR) to the nearby faults.

The earthquakes occurred on 10th May (M3.4), 29th May 2020 (M 4.4), 29th May 2011 and 01st June 2017 are recorded up to 32 broad band seismometers. The events were located using the Seisan software package 53 maintaining a small root mean square error (rms) of 0.27 to 0.5, respectively using the data of the stations having good signal to noise ratio. The fault plane solutions (FPS) of these events have been determined using 12 local stations waveform data (NPL, AYAN, JHJR, KUDL, SONA, UJWA, GNR, JMIU, KKR, NRLA, NDI and BISR) (Fig.  2 ). The ISOLA software package has been used to determine the FPS. A correlation coefficient (between the observed and synthetic data) of > 0.5 and the double couple percentage (DC %) of > 50% in the moment tensor decomposition have been considered for finalizing the FPS (For details see supplementary data). Addionally, we also determined the Fault Plane Solutions of the events using first motion data (supplementary Figs. 6 and 7). In this exercise, FOCMAC subroutine in SEISAN software package has been used. In all cases FPS obtained by first motion polarity are consistent (in terms of fault mechanism) with the FPS obtained by waveform inversion technique. However, strike, dip and rake values are found to be different but agreed closely with the data derived by waveform inversion. The strain energy has been estimated for Delhi region using the standard formulation suggested by Kanamori 54 to examine its spatial distribution. The earthquake catalog of the Delhi region for the period of 1998–2020 was used for the purpose (For details see supplementary data). The FPS computed in the present study have been compared with the earlier FPS in Delhi region to help in refining the current understanding of subsurface structural trends. The past works on geophysical, geological and seismological studies have been reviewed and a link between trends suggested by the FPS, energy estimation and the subsurface structures has been established.

Fuloria, R. C., Geological framework of Ganga Basin. Selected Lectures on Petrol. Expl., inst. Petrol Expl. , ONGC 1, 170–186 (1969).

Sastri, V. V., Bhandari, L. L., Raju, A. T. R. & Dutta, A. K. Tectonic framework and subsurface stratigraphy of the Ganga Basin. J. Geol. Soc. India. 12 , 222–233 (1971).

Google Scholar  

Wessel, P. & Smith, W. H. New, improved version of Generic Mapping Tools released. Eos Trans. AGU. 79 (47), 579 (1998).

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Molnar, P., Fitch, T. J. & Wu, F. T. Fault plane solutions of shallow earthquakes and contemporary tectonics of Asia. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 19 (2), 101–112 (1973).

Bansal, B. K. et al. Source study of two small earthquakes of Delhi, India and estimation of ground motion from future moderate, local events. J. Seismol. 13 , 89–105 (2009).

Singh, S. K. et al. Delhi earthquake of 25 November 2007 (Mw4.1): Implications for seismic hazard. Curr. Sci. 99 (7), 939–947 (2010).

Verma, M., Singh, R. J. & Bansal, B. K. Soft sediments and damage pattern: A few case studies from large Indian earthquakes vis-a-vis seismic risk evaluation. Nat. Hazards 74 , 1829–1851 (2014).

Article   Google Scholar  

Medlicott, H. B. On the geological structure and relations of the southern portion of the Himalayan ranges between the rivers Ganges and the Ravee. Mem. Geol. Surv. Ind. 3 (2), 1–212 (1864).

Theobald, W. The Siwalik group of the Sub-Himalayan region. Rec. Geol. Surv. Ind. 14 (1), 66–125 (1881).

Oldham, T. A. Catalogue of Indian Earthquake from the earliest time to end of AD 1869. Mem. Geol. Surv. India 19 (3), 163–215 (1883).

Middlemiss, C. S. Geological sketch of Nainital with some remarks on the natural conditions governing mountain slopes. Rec. Geo. Surv India. 23 , 213–234 (1890).

Wadia, D. N. The Geology of Poonch State, Kashmir and Adjacent portions of the Punjab. Mem. Geol. Surv. Ind. 51 (2), 363 (1928).

Auden, J. B. The geology of the Krol Belt. Rec. Geol. Surv. Ind. 67 (4), 357–454 (1934).

Agocs, W. B. Aeromagnetic survey in Indo-Gangetic plains. ONGC Technical Report , p. 33 (1957).

Krishnan, M. S. & Swaminath, J. The great Vindhyan basin of Southern India. J. Geol. Soc. India. 1 , 10–30 (1959).

Sengupta, S. N. Basement configuration of the Indo-Gangetic plains shown by aeromagnetic surveys. Pr Seminar Oil Pros in Ganga Valley, Tech. Publ. Oil Natural Gas Comm. India 52–54 (1962).

Sengupta, S. N. Possible subsurface structures below the Himalayas and the Gangetic Plains. 22nd Pro. Int. Geol. Congress , 334–352 (1964).

Valdiya, K. S. Himalayan transverse faults and folds and their parallelism with subsurface structures of north Indian plains. Tectonophysics 32 , 353–386 (1976).

Karunakaran, C. & Ranga Rao, A. Status of exploration for hydrocarbons in the Himalayan Region—Contribution to stratigraphy and structure. J. Geol. Soc. India 4 , 1–66 (1976).

Arora, B. R. et al. Geomagnetic induction and conductive structures in northwest India. Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc. 69 (2), 459–475 (1982).

Arora, B. R. & Mahashabde, M. V. A transverse conductive structure in the northwest Himalaya. Phys. Earth. Planet. Inter. 45(2) , 119–127(1987).

Mallick K., Vasanthi A. & Sharma K. K. Applications to Geological and Environmental Problems: Minerals. In: Bouguer Gravity Regional and Residual Separation: Application to Geology and Environment 288 (Springer, Dordrecht, 2012).

Book   Google Scholar  

Raiverman, V., Srivastava, A. K. & Prasad, D. N. Structural style in northwestern Himalayan foothills. Himal. Geol. 15 , 263–280 (1994).

Valdiya, K. S. Tectonic framework of India: A review and interpretation of recent structural and tectonic studies. Geophys. Res. Bull. 11 , 79–114 (1973).

Chandra, U. Seismicity, earthquakes mechanisms and tectonics along the Himalayan Mountain range and vicinity. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 16 , 109–131 (1978).

Arora, B. R., Gahalaut, V. K. & Kumar, N. Structural control on along-strike variation in the seismicity of the northwest Himalaya. J. Asian Earth Sci. 57 , 15–24 (2012).

Arora, B. R. Implications of electrical conductivity structures in the tectonic framework of the northwest India. Curr. Sci. 64 , 848–855 (1993).

Dubey, C. S. et al. Present activity and seismogenic potential of Himalayan sub-parallel thrust faults in Delhi: inferences from remote sensing, GPR, gravity data and seismicity. Near Surf. Geophys. 10 , 369–380 (2012).

GSI. Seismotectonic Atlas of India and its Environs. (Geol. Surv. India, Banglore, 2000).

Jade, S. Estimates of plate velocity and crustal deformation in the Indian subcontinent using GPS geodesy. Curr. Sci. 86 , 1143–1448 (2004).

Patel, N. K. et al. Seismicity around the Mahendragarh-Dehradun basement fault in the western Ganga plain, India: A neotectonic perspective. Int. J. Earth. Sci. 109 , 689–706 (2020).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Ravi Kumar, M., Mishra, D. C. & Singh, B. Lithosphere, crust and basement ridges across Ganga and Indus basins and seismicity along the Himalayan front, India and Western Fold Belt, Pakistan. J. Asian Earth Sci. 75 , 126–140 (2013).

Godin, L. & Harris, L. B. Tracking basement cross-strike discontinuities within the subducted Indian crust beneath the Himalayan orogen using gravity data - relationship to upper crustal faults. Geophys. J. Int. 198 (1), 198–215 (2014).

Dwivedi, D., Chamoli, A. & Pandey, A. K. Crustal structure and lateral variations in Moho beneath the Delhi fold belt, NW India: Insight from gravity data modeling and inversion. Phys. Earth. Planet. Inter. 297 , 106317 (2019).

Voo, V. R., Spakman, W. & Bijwaard, H. Tethyan subducted slabs under India. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 171 (1), 7–20 (1999).

Chandra, U. Earthquakes of Peninsular India—A seismotectonic study. Bull. Geol. Soc. Am. 67 (5), 1387–1413 (1977).

Bapat, A., Kulkarni, R. C. & Guha, S. K. Catalogue of earthquakes in India and neighborhood from historical period upto 1979 1–211 (ISET, 1983).

Ambraseys, N. & Jackson, D. A note on early earthquakes in northern India and southern Tibet. Curr. Sci. 84 (4), 570–582 (2003).

Rajendran, C. P. & Rajendran, K. The Status of Central Seismic Gap: A perspective based on spatial and temporal aspects of large Himalayan Earthquakes. Tectonophysics 395 , 19–39 (2005).

Iyengar R. N. & Ghosh S. Seismic hazard mapping of Delhi city. In: Proceedings of 13th world conference on earthquake engineering. Vancouver, B.C., Canada . Paper No. 180 (2004).

Bhattacharya, S. N. & Dattatrayam, R. S. Some characteristics of recent earthquake sequences in Peninsular India. Gondwana. Geol. Mag. 5 , 67–85 (2003).

Chouhan, R. K. S. Seismotectonics of Delhi region. Proc. Indian Nat. Sci. Acad. 41 , 429–447 (1975).

Kamble, V. P. & Chaudhary, H. M. Recent seismic activity in Delhi and neighborhood. Mausam 30 , 305–312 (1979).

Iyengar, R. N. Seismic status of Delhi megacity. Curr. Sci. 78 (5), 568–574 (2000).

IMD. Report on micro earthquake survey of the Jind region (Haryana), pp. 1–8 (2004).

Shukla, A. K., Prakash, R., Singh, R. K., Mishra, P. S. & Bhatnagar, A. K. Seismotectonic implications of Delhi region through fault plane solutions of some recent earthquakes. Curr. Sci. 93 , 1848–1853 (2007).

Richter, C. F. Sporadic and continuous seismicity of faults and regions, recent crustal movements. Bull. Roy. Soc. New Zealand. 9 , 171–173 (1971).

Pandey, A. P., Suresh, G., Singh, A. P., Sutar, A. K. & Bansal, B. K. A widely felt Tremor (ML 35) of 12 April 2020 in and around NCT Delhi in the backdrop of prevailing COVID-19 Pandemic lockdown: Analysis and Observations. Geomat. Nat. Haz. Risk 11 (1), 1638–1652 (2020).

Sokos, E. & Zahradník J. Evaluating Centroid-Moment-Tensor Uncertainty in the New 29 Version of ISOLA Software (2013).

Bansal, B. K. & Verma, M. The M 4.9 Delhi earthquake of 5 March 2012. Curr. Sci. 102 (12), 1704–1708 (2012).

Lin, J. & Wu, W. Spatio-temporal distribution of seismic moment release near the source area of the 2011 Tohoku-Oki earthquake. Earth. Planet. Sp. 64 (2), 1067–1075 (2012).

Doglioni, C., Barba, S., Carminati, E. & Riguzzi, F. Fault on-off versus strain rate and earthquakes energy. Geosci. Front. 6 (2), 265–276 (2015).

Ottemöller, L., Voss, P. & Havskov, J. Seisan earthquake analysis software for Windows, Solaris, Linux and MacOSX (2017).

Kanamori, H. Magnitude scale and quantification of earthquakes. Tectonophysics 93 , 185–199 (1983).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are thankful to the National Centre for Seismology, Ministry of Earth Sciences, New Delhi for providing the seismological data. Suggestions offered by S. Roy and B.R. Arora have helped in improving the MS considerably. The consistent encouragement and support received from Secretary, Ministry of Earth Sciences has made it possible to take up the study.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

National Center for Seismology, Ministry of Earth Sciences, Lodhi Road, New Delhi, 110003, India

Brijesh K. Bansal & Kapil Mohan

Geoscience/Seismology Division, Ministry of Earth Sciences, Lodhi Road, New Delhi, 110003, India

Brijesh K. Bansal & Mithila Verma

Borehole Geophysics Research Laboratory, Ministry of Earth Sciences, Karad, Maharashtra, India

Anup K. Sutar

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

B.K.B. conceptualized and guided the study. K.M. wrote the manuscript and carried out the analysis. M.V. reviewed the manuscript. A.K.S. participated in the analysis and preparation of figures. All authors contributed for production of results and writing the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kapil Mohan .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary information., rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Bansal, B.K., Mohan, K., Verma, M. et al. A holistic seismotectonic model of Delhi region. Sci Rep 11 , 13818 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-93291-9

Download citation

Received : 08 July 2020

Accepted : 07 May 2021

Published : 05 July 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-93291-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Identifying seismicity pattern before major earthquakes in the western nepal and adjoining region (28.5°n to 31.0°n − 78°e to 82.96°e).

• Ram Krishna Tiwari
• Shiva Chaudhary
• Daya Shanker

Environmental Earth Sciences (2024)

Geoelectric characterisation of the junction of seismically active Delhi Hardwar Ridge and Delhi Sargodha Ridge

• Gautam Rawat
• Kapil Mohan
• O. P. Mishra

Scientific Reports (2023)

Unravelling the dynamics and causes of land subsidence in the National Capital Territory of Delhi, India, by spaceborne and in situ observations

• R. S. Chatterjee
• Pranshu Pranjal

Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment (2023)

A source and ground motion study of earthquakes in and near Delhi (the National Capital Region), India

• Brijesh K. Bansal
• S. K. Singh

Natural Hazards (2022)

Delineation of the Causative Fault of Recent Earthquakes (April–May 2020) in Delhi from Seismological and Morphometric Analysis

Journal of the Geological Society of India (2021)

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

• Feature stories /

Resilient reconstruction: 20 years after Gujarat earthquake

As India celebrated its 52nd Republic Day on 26 January 2001, a massive earthquake measuring 7.9 on the Richter Scale struck Kutch district of western Gujarat at 8:46 am.

Over 37.8 million people were affected as the devastating earthquake with an epicenter north-east of Bhuj city, destroyed homes, schools, roads, communication systems and power lines. The earthquake was followed by several aftershocks over the next few days.

As much as the devastation, what marks the 20th anniversary of the Gujarat earthquake is the opportunity the government took in rebuilding the State on sustainable disaster-resistant foundations.

The Government of Gujarat responded rapidly with emergency relief services to mitigate loss to lives, livelihoods and property, and continued in the emergency-phase mode until mid-March 2001 to ensure services reached the last mile.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who was then the chief minister of Gujarat, started the rehabilitation phase with an aim to “build back better” with “owner-driven reconstruction” to achieve the long-term goal of sustainable disaster-resilient development.

“Gujarat has a tradition and legacy on resilience considering the risk reduction initiatives in the recovery efforts from the Gujarat earthquake in 2001. The health care facilities in the State have been rebuilt as earthquake resilient. Twenty years later, we are confident Gujarat will also apply the same risk reduction efforts in strengthening health and related systems to be resilient post COVID-19 pandemic,” said Dr Roderico H. Ofrin, WHO Country Representative to India.

Gujarat became the first state in India to enact the Gujarat State Disaster Management Act 2003 to provide legal and regulatory framework for effective disaster management and risk mitigation through implementing, monitoring and coordinating reconstruction and rehabilitation efforts. The Act clarifies the roles of principal stakeholders in disaster management.

The  Act became the blueprint for India’s Disaster Management Act, 2005, at the national level which led to the creation of the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) headed by the prime minister as the chairperson, and State Disaster Management Authorities headed by respective Chief Ministers to lead the response and creation of other institutions like National Institute of Disaster Management and National Disaster Response Force.

Within days of the earthquake, temporary health centres were set up in tents and a public health lab was established in a pre-fabricated structure in Bhuj to ensure continuity of health services and disease surveillance. This was rapidly followed by GIS-based disease surveillance as an early warning mechanism to prevent outbreaks.

The State Government rebuilt District Hospital of Kutch, G K General Hospital, which had completely collapsed during the 2001 earthquake, using the Base Isolation Technique structural technique that makes buildings earthquake-resilient.

Twenty years on, remarkable progress has been made in building a swifter response and a resilient future. The WHO Safe Hospital Initiative, WHO Health Emergency and Disaster Risk Management Framework, The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, and other supporting global frameworks, as well as the revision of National Building Codes 2019, National Earthquake Risk Mitigation Programme and global platforms like Coalition of Disaster Resilient Infrastructure, are just a few examples of the paradigm shift in the way India approaches future risk and becomes disaster ready.

Bhuj Earthquake India 2001 – A Complete Study

Bhuj earthquake india.

Gujarat : Disaster on a day of celebration : 51st Republic Day on January 26, 2001

• 7.9 on the Richter scale.
• 8.46 AM January 26th 2001
• 20,800 dead

Basic Facts

• Earthquake: 8:46am on January 26, 2001
• Epicenter: Near Bhuj in Gujarat, India
• Magnitude: 7.9 on the Richter Scale

Geologic Setting

• Indian Plate Sub ducting beneath Eurasian Plate
• Continental Drift
• Convergent Boundary

Specifics of 2001 Quake

Compression Stress between region’s faults

Depth: 16km

Probable Fault: Kachchh Mainland

Fault Type: Reverse Dip-Slip (Thrust Fault)

The earthquake’s epicentre was 20km from Bhuj. A city with a population of 140,000 in 2001. The city is in the region known as the Kutch region. The effects of the earthquake were also felt on the north side of the Pakistan border, in Pakistan 18 people were killed.

Tectonic systems

The earthquake was caused at the convergent plate boundary between the Indian plate and the Eurasian plate boundary. These pushed together and caused the earthquake. However as Bhuj is in an intraplate zone, the earthquake was not expected, this is one of the reasons so many buildings were destroyed – because people did not build to earthquake resistant standards in an area earthquakes were not thought to occur. In addition the Gujarat earthquake is an excellent example of liquefaction, causing buildings to ‘sink’ into the ground which gains a consistency of a liquid due to the frequency of the earthquake.

India : Vulnerability to earthquakes

• 56% of the total area of the Indian Republic is vulnerable to seismic activity .
• 12% of the area comes under Zone V (A&N Islands, Bihar, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, J&K, N.E.States, Uttaranchal)
• 18% area in Zone IV (Bihar, Delhi, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, J&K, Lakshadweep, Maharashtra, Punjab, Sikkim, Uttaranchal, W. Bengal)
• 26% area in Zone III (Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Goa, Gujarat, Haryana, Kerala, Maharashtra, Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttaranchal, W. Bengal)
• Gujarat: an advanced state on the west coast of India.
• On 26 January 2001, an earthquake struck the Kutch district of Gujarat at 8.46 am.
• Epicentre 20 km North East of Bhuj, the headquarter of Kutch.
• The Indian Meteorological Department estimated the intensity of the earthquake at 6.9 Richter. According to the US Geological Survey, the intensity of the quake was 7.7 Richter.
• The quake was the worst in India in the last 180 years.

What earthquakes do

• Casualties: loss of life and injury.
• Loss of housing.
• Damage to infrastructure.
• Disruption of transport and communications.
• Breakdown of social order.
• Loss of industrial output.
• Loss of business.
• Disruption of marketing systems.
• The earthquake devastated Kutch. Practically all buildings and structures of Kutch were brought down.
• Ahmedabad, Rajkot, Jamnagar, Surendaranagar and Patan were heavily damaged.
• Nearly 19,000 people died. Kutch alone reported more than 17,000 deaths.
• 1.66 lakh people were injured. Most were handicapped for the rest of their lives.
• The dead included 7,065 children (0-14 years) and 9,110 women.
• There were 348 orphans and 826 widows.

Loss classification

Deaths and injuries: demographics and labour markets

Effects on assets and GDP

Effects on fiscal accounts

Financial markets

Disaster loss

• Initial estimate Rs. 200 billion.
• Came down to Rs. 144 billion.
• No inventory of buildings
• Non-engineered buildings
• Land and buildings
• Stocks and flows
• Reconstruction costs (Rs. 106 billion) and loss estimates (Rs. 99 billion) are different
• Public good considerations

Human Impact: Tertiary effects

• Affected 15.9 million people out of 37.8 in the region (in areas such as Bhuj, Bhachau, Anjar, Ganhidham, Rapar)
• High demand for food, water, and medical care for survivors
• Humanitarian intervention by groups such as Oxfam: focused on Immediate response and then rehabilitation
• Of survivors, many require persistent medical attention
• Region continues to require assistance long after quake has subsided
• International aid vital to recovery

Social Impacts

• 80% of water and food sources were destroyed.
• The obvious social impacts are that around 20,000 people were killed and near 200,000 were injured.
• However at the same time, looting and violence occurred following the quake, and this affected many people too.
• On the other hand, the earthquake resulted in millions of USD in aid, which has since allowed the Bhuj region to rebuild itself and then grow in a way it wouldn’t have done otherwise.
• The final major social effect was that around 400,000 Indian homes were destroyed resulting in around 2 million people being made homeless immediately following the quake.

Social security and insurance

• Ex gratia payment: death relief and monetary benefits to the injured
• Major and minor injuries
•  Cash doles
• Government insurance fund
• Group insurance schemes
• Claim ratio

Demographics and labour market

• Geographic pattern of ground motion, spatial array of population and properties at risk, and their risk vulnerabilities.
• Low population density was a saving grace.
• Extra fatalities among women
• Effect on dependency ratio
• Farming and textiles

Economic  Impacts

• Total damage estimated at around $7 billion. However $18 billion of aid was invested in the Bhuj area.
• Over 15km of tarmac road networks were completely destroyed.
• In the economic capital of the Gujarat region, Ahmedabad, 58 multi storey buildings were destroyed, these buildings contained many of the businesses which were generating the wealth of the region.
• Many schools were destroyed and the literacy rate of the Gujarat region is now the lowest outside southern India.

Impact on GDP

• Applying ICOR
• Rs. 99 billion – deduct a third as loss of current value added.
• Get GDP loss as Rs. 23 billion
• Adjust for heterogeneous capital, excess capacity, loss Rs. 20 billion.
• Reconstruction efforts.
• Likely to have been Rs. 15 billion.

Fiscal accounts

• Differentiate among different taxes: sales tax, stamp duties and registration fees, motor vehicle tax, electricity duty, entertainment tax, profession tax, state excise and other taxes. Shortfall of Rs. 9 billion of which about Rs. 6 billion unconnected with earthquake.
• Earthquake related other flows.
• Expenditure:Rs. 8 billion on relief. Rs. 87 billion on rehabilitation.

Impact on Revenue Continue Reading

Comments are closed.

Privacy Overview

• India Today
• Business Today
• Harper's Bazaar
• Brides Today
• Cosmopolitan
• India Today Hindi
• Reader’s Digest
• Aaj Tak Campus

Download App

6 earthquakes, measuring above 4 on Richter scale, jolted India in March this year. Details

For the past two-to-three years, india, specifically the northern states, has been witnessing some strong earthquake activity. what is making indian states more prone to earthquakes.

Listen to Story

At least nine people were killed, while several others were reported injured after a major 6.8 magnitude earthquake jolted parts of Pakistan on Tuesday . The epicentre of the earthquake was Afghanistan's Hindu Kush region, while its depth was 180 kilometres, according to the Pakistan Meteorological Department.

EARTHQUAKE-PRONE REGIONS IN INDIA

In India, several states are more prone to earthquakes. According to a study, there are four different earthquake-prone zones in the country, which evaluate the impact of tremors.

Zone 1 falls under the low-intensity category and is along the Karnataka Plateau.

Zone 2 is for moderate-intensity earthquakes, comprising Kerala, Goa, and the Lakshadweep Islands, as well as portions of Punjab, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Maharashtra, Odisha, and Tamil Nadu.

Zone 3 is for high-intensity earthquakes. It encompasses the remaining portions of Jammu & Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh, the Delhi-NCR, Sikkim, northern portions of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, West Bengal, the western coast of Maharashtra and Rajasthan.

Zone 4 is for extremely severe earthquakes covering the regions of North Bihar, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, the Rann of Kutch in Gujarat, and the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.

RECENT EARTHQUAKES IN INDIA

• March 21, 2023 - 6.8 magnitude earthquake, epicentred in Afghanistan, jolted parts of India, including states falling under the 'zone 2' category
• March 12, 2023 - 4.8 magnitude earthquake, epicentred 76 km from Wangjing, Manipur
• March 8, 2023 - 4.0 magnitude earthquake, epicentred 10 km depth in Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan
• March 7, 2023 - 4.9 magnitude earthquake, epicentred 10 km depth in Andaman and Nicobar Islands, India
• March 3, 2023 - 4.1 magnitude earthquake, epicentred 10 km depth along Arunachal Pradesh, India
• March 2, 2023 - 4.0 magnitude earthquake, epicentred 10 km depth along Lobujya, Eastern region in Nepal
• February 24, 2023 - 4.1 magnitude earthquake, epicentred 10 km depth in Islamabad, Pakistan
• February 22, 2023 - 4.8 magnitude earthquake, epicentred 27 km depth in Jumla, Mid Western, Nepal
• February 16, 2023 - 4.3 magnitude earthquake, epicentred 61 km depth along Chhatak, Sylhet, Bangladesh
• February 12, 2023 - 4.0 magnitude earthquake, epicentred 65 km depth along Mangan, Sikkim, India

Earthquakes in India, Types, Zones, Causes and Impacts

Earthquakes in India are primarily caused by movement of the Indian tectonic plate, which is colliding with Eurasian plate. Know all about Earthquakes in India, Types, Zones, Causes and Impacts.

Table of Contents

An earthquake is the shaking of the earth. It happens naturally when energy is released, creating waves that travel in all directions. When an earthquake occurs the Earth vibrates and these vibrations are detected by seismographs. Moderate earthquakes happen every day, but big, damaging earthquakes are rare. Earthquakes are more common around the edges of tectonic plates. In India, more earthquakes occur where the Indian Plate meets the Eurasian Plate.

Earthquakes in India

Earthquakes in India mainly happen due to the Indian tectonic plate is colliding into the Eurasian plate. The peninsular region of India is usually stable but sometimes earthquakes occur on the edges of smaller plates. For example the 1967 Koyna earthquake and the 1993 Latur earthquake happened in these areas.

India is divided into four seismic zones (II, III, IV, V) based on the level of seismicity:

• Zone II: Low seismicity
• Zone III: Moderate seismicity
• Zone IV: High seismicity
• Zone V: Very high seismicity (includes areas like the Himalayan region, northeastern states, Kutch, and Andaman & Nicobar Islands)

Zones V and IV cover the entire Himalayan region, North-East India, Western and Northern Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Delhi, and parts of Gujarat.

Most of the peninsular region is in a low-risk zone,

while the northern lowlands and western coastal areas are in a moderate hazard zone.

Types of Indian Earthquakes

In India, earthquakes can be categorized based on their origins and the tectonic settings. Here are the main types:

1. Tectonic Earthquakes

These are the most common types of earthquakes in India, caused by the movement of the Earth’s tectonic plates. They can be divided into:

Interplate Earthquakes : Happen at the boundaries between two tectonic plates. For example, the Himalayan region has interplate earthquakes because the Indian and Eurasian plates collide there. Intraplate Earthquakes : Happen within a tectonic plate not at its boundary. The 1993 Latur earthquake in Maharashtra is an example.

2. Volcanic Earthquakes

A special type of earthquake called a volcanic earthquake happens only in areas with active volcanoes. These earthquakes occur when molten rock (magma) is injected into or withdrawn from solid rock causing stress changes. This can make the ground sink or crack. These earthquakes can also happen when rock moves to fill spaces left by magma. Volcanic earthquakes do not mean the volcano will erupt they can happen at any time.

3. Induced Earthquakes

These are caused by human activities such as mining, reservoir-induced seismicity (due to the filling of large dams), geothermal energy extraction, and oil extraction. Examples include:

• Reservoir-Induced Seismicity: The Koyna earthquake (1967) in Maharashtra is believed to have been induced by the filling of the Koyna dam reservoir.

4. Collapse Earthquakes

These happen when underground caves or mines collapse. They are usually small and only affect a local area.

5. Explosion Earthquakes

These are caused by explosions, such as nuclear tests or large chemical explosions. For example, nuclear tests conducted in Pokhran, Rajasthan, generated minor seismic activity.

Earthquake Zones in India

Complete List of All Zones of Earthquakes in India:

The zones are identified using the Modified Mercalli (MM) intensity, which measures how earthquakes affect areas. After the Killari earthquake in Maharashtra in 1993 the seismic map was updated. The low danger zone called Seismic Zone I was combined with Seismic Zone II. So Zone I is no longer shown on the map.

It is a low-intensity area, covering 40.93% of the country’s land. This includes the Karnataka Plateau and the peninsula region.

This region has moderate intensity and covers 30.79% of the country’s area. It includes Kerala, Goa, and the Lakshadweep Islands, along with parts of Punjab, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Maharashtra, Odisha, and Tamil Nadu.

This is called a high-intensity zone. It covers 17.49% of the country’s land. It includes the rest of Jammu & Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh, Delhi, Sikkim, northern parts of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, West Bengal, the western coast of Maharashtra, and Rajasthan.

This is an extremely severe zone. It covers 10.79% of the country’s land. It includes North Bihar, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, the Rann of Kutch in Gujarat, and the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.

Major Earthquakes in India List

Some of the devastating earthquakes have affected India. More than 58.6% of Indian Territory is vulnerable to earthquakes of moderate to very high intensity.

Key Regions Prone to Different Types of Earthquakes

List of Major Earthquakes in India Year-wise for UPSC

Causes of Earthquakes in India

Avalanches and landslides.

Tremors can make slopes unstable and collapse causing debris to fall and create landslides mainly in hilly areas. Earthquakes can also trigger avalanches, making large amounts of ice fall from snowy peaks. For example, the 2015 Nepal earthquake caused several avalanches on and near Mount Everest.

The 2011 Sikkim earthquake caused landslides and significant property damage, especially at the Singik and Upper Teesta hydroelectric projects.

Earthquakes can cause flash floods and make dams and reservoirs fail. Avalanches and landslides can block rivers, leading to flooding. For example, the 1950 Assam earthquake created a barrier in the Dihang River with huge debris, causing flash floods upstream.

Tsunamis are waves created when an ocean basin is disturbed displacing a large amount of water. Earthquakes can move the seafloor, causing these big waves. On December 26, 2004, an earthquake off Sumatra’s coast caused the Indian Ocean Tsunami.

This happened because the Indian plate moved under the Burmese plate. Over 240000 people died in the Indian Ocean region and nearby countries. In 2011 a massive undersea earthquake in Japan caused 10-meter tsunami waves during the Tohoku earthquake. This led to a nuclear meltdown at Fukushima Daiichi, causing major global concerns due to radioactive fallout.

Impact of Earthquakes in India

Loss of human life and property.

Human towns and buildings suffer severe damage when the ground moves up, down, or sideways. For example, the 2015 Nepal earthquake caused massive urban destruction. This 7.8-magnitude earthquake was 8.2 kilometers deep. Many lives were lost due to uncontrolled urban growth, poorly built structures, and unscientific designs. Kathmandu’s urban areas were badly hit causing 8000 deaths and $10 billion in economic loss

Alterations to the River’s Course

One major effect of an earthquake is that it can change the course of a river. This happens when debris from the earthquake blocks the river’s flow forcing the water to find a new path. This alteration can lead to flooding and other significant changes in the landscape.

Fountains of Mud

Earthquakes can force mud and boiling water to the surface. After the 1934 Bihar earthquake, fields were covered in knee-deep mud.

Earthquakes damage gas pipelines and electric systems. This makes it much harder to put out fires caused by the earthquake.

Mitigation Measures for Earthquakes in India

The national center for seismology.

Governmental organisations receive earthquake monitoring and hazard reports from a department of the Ministry of Earth Sciences. There are three divisions in it: Geophysical Observation System, Earthquake Hazard and Risk Assessment, and Earthquake Monitoring and services.

National Earthquake Risk Mitigation Project (NERMP)

Improving both the non-structural and structural parts of earthquake safety programs helps reduce risks in high-danger areas. In places with strong earthquakes, important safety measures are implemented. The NDMA which is in charge of the project, has made a detailed project report (DPR).

National Building Code (NBC)

It is a detailed building code and national regulation that sets rules for construction across the country. The Planning Commission first published it in 1970, and it was updated in 1983. There were three major changes: two in 1987 and one in 1997. The National Building Code of India 2005 (NBC 2005) replaced the old version. It focuses on addressing natural disaster challenges and using the best international practices.

Building Materials & Technology Promotion Council (BMTPC)

It works on projects to strengthen important buildings and raise awareness among people and government organizations. The goal is to help the public and policymakers reduce the risk to many existing public and private buildings

NDMA Guidelines for Earthquakes

In 2007, the NDMA released detailed earthquake guidelines. These rules tell State Governments, Central Ministries, and Departments what to do to make disaster management plans focused on earthquake risk. The guidelines are based on six main principles

• The building of new structures that is earthquake-resistant.
• Retrofitting and selective seismic strengthening of existing structures.
• Enforcement and regulation.
• Preparation and awareness.
• Building capacity;
• Emergency reaction.

Biggest Earthquakes in India

The devastating Bhuj earthquake happened on 26 January 2001 near the Pakistani border in Gujarat India. The largest earthquake in India with a magnitude of 8.6, occurred in the India-China region on 15 August 1950. It caused the death of 1530 people due to tectonic plates shifting 30 km deep.

Earthquake in the Indian Ocean

The 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami important points

• Magnitude: Between 9.1 and 9.3 on the Richter scale, making it one of the largest earthquakes ever recorded.
• Duration: Faulting lasted between 8.3 and 10 minutes, unusually long for an earthquake of this magnitude.
• Aftershocks: Numerous aftershocks continued for 3 to 4 months after the initial earthquake.
• Energy Release: The earthquake released a massive amount of energy, causing significant geological effects.
• Earth’s Axis Shift: It is believed that the earthquake caused a slight shift in the Earth’s axis due to the redistribution of mass.
• Tsunami Generation: The seismic activity caused vertical movement of the seafloor, displacing a large volume of water and triggering a tsunami.
• Impact: Indonesia was the first and hardest-hit country due to its proximity to the epicenter.
• Casualties: Approximately 170000 people lost their lives, making it one of the deadliest natural disasters in recorded history.

Sharing is caring!

Earthquakes in India FAQs

What are the 5 largest earthquake ever recorded in india.

• 1993 Latur Earthquake • 1991 Uttarkashi Earthquake • 1941 Andaman Islands Earthquake • 1975 Kinnaur Earthquake • 1967 Koynanagar Earthquake

Which is the biggest earthquake in India?

The devastating Bhuj earthquake of 2001 took place on January 26, 2001, in the Indian state of Gujarat, close to the Pakistani border.

Which city in India is most prone to earthquake?

• Guwahati • Srinagar • Mumbai • Pune • Kerala • Delhi • Chennai • Kochi • Thiruvananthapuram • Patna

What causes earthquake in India?

The entire Himalayan belt as well as the country’s north-eastern portion is prone to powerful earthquakes with magnitudes greater than 8.0. The Indian plate is moving toward the Eurasian plate at a pace of roughly 50 mm per year, which is the primary cause of earthquakes in these areas.

Which place is safe from earthquake?

Go somewhere open that is far from any trees, telephone poles, or structures. Once outside, crouch low and remain there until the trembling stops. The most hazardous spot to be is close to a building's exterior walls. Frequently, the building's windows, façade, and architectural details are the first to give way.

Was there an earthquake in Delhi?

On November 06, 2023 strong tremors were felt in Delhi and NCR after two earthquakes that has struck Nepal in the last four days.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Trending Event

• RPSC RAS Apply Online 2024
• SSC MTS Admit Card 2024
• TNPSC Group 2 Answer Key 2024
• SSC GD Apply Online 2025

Recent Posts

UPSC Exam 2024

• UPSC Online Coaching
• UPSC Syllabus 2024
• UPSC Prelims Syllabus 2024
• UPSC Mains Syllabus 2024
• UPSC Exam Pattern 2024
• UPSC Age Limit 2024
• UPSC Calendar 2025
• UPSC Syllabus in Hindi
• UPSC Full Form
• UPPSC Exam 2024
• UPPSC Calendar
• UPPSC Syllabus 2024
• UPPSC Exam Pattern 2024
• UPPSC Application Form 2024
• UPPSC Eligibility Criteria 2024
• UPPSC Admit card 2024
• UPPSC Salary And Posts
• UPPSC Cut Off
• UPPSC Previous Year Paper

BPSC Exam 2024

• BPSC 70th Notification
• BPSC 69th Exam Analysis
• BPSC Admit Card
• BPSC Syllabus
• BPSC Exam Pattern
• BPSC Cut Off
• BPSC Question Papers

SSC CGL 2024

• SSC CGL Exam 2024
• SSC CGL Syllabus 2024
• SSC CGL Cut off
• SSC CGL Apply Online
• SSC CGL Salary
• SSC CGL Previous Year Question Paper
• SSC CGL Admit Card 2024
• SSC MTS 2024
• SSC MTS Apply Online 2024
• SSC MTS Syllabus 2024
• SSC MTS Salary 2024
• SSC MTS Eligibility Criteria 2024
• SSC MTS Previous Year Paper

SSC Stenographer 2024

• SSC Stenographer Notification 2024
• SSC Stenographer Apply Online 2024
• SSC Stenographer Syllabus 2024
• SSC Stenographer Salary 2024
• SSC Stenographer Eligibility Criteria 2024

SSC GD Constable 2025

• SSC GD Salary 2025
• SSC GD Constable Syllabus 2025
• SSC GD Eligibility Criteria 2025

IMPORTANT EXAMS

• Terms & Conditions
• Return & Refund Policy
• Privacy Policy

Earthquakes in India

Most recent events.

• Sept. 24, 2:54 pm Magnitude 4.6: 138 km northeast of Bamboo Flat at a depth of 97.54 km.
• Sept. 22, 12:12 am Magnitude 4.3: 174 km southwest of Port Blair at a depth of ten km.
• Sept. 21, 10:11 pm Magnitude 4.9: 168 km southwest of Port Blair at a depth of 26.76 km.
• Sept. 19, 10:50 am Magnitude 5.5: 168 km southwest of Port Blair at a depth of ten km.
• Sept. 14, 4:26 pm Magnitude 4.9: Nicobar Islands at a depth of ten km.
• Sept. 13, 2:52 pm Magnitude 4.7: 248 km east of Port Blair at a depth of ten km.

Earthquakes in India since 1950

Lex-O-Pedia

• Login  /  Join

Know what is hot in the legal fraternity and governance. We curate everything going around in Legal aspects of the country.

Recent Posts

Trending Posts

Editorial picks from the Team behind Legal Wires and from the desk of the Editorial Team. This section is dedicated to the vision of Legal Wires behind starting it.

Case study of popular cases with in depth analysis and opinion of various personalities.

To help you understand the legal terminologies we will curate and describe every single word out there. With detailed definitions and references we will make it Encyclopedia of Legal Terms.

At Legal Wires, we aim to bring all the materials you can read and learn from. We will give you multiple perspectives and educating articles.

Sep 25, 2024 09:22 UTC

Sep 25, 2024 at 09:22 UTC

Case Study: Shyam Narayan Chouksey v. Union of India (UOI) and Ors.

“Respect for the National Anthem is essential, but mandating its performance in cinema halls is a matter left to discretion, pending the government’s decision based on a committee’s recommendations.”

Citation: AIR 2018 SC 357

Date of Judgment: 9 th January, 2018

Court: Supreme Court of India

Bench: Dipak Misra (CJ), A.M. Khanwilkar (J), Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud (J)

• In this Public Interest Litigation (PIL), Shyam Narayan Chouksey approached the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution, seeking directions for ensuring respect towards the National Anthem. He urged the Court to issue specific guidelines on when and how respect for the National Anthem should be demonstrated. He also asked for prohibitions on using the National Anthem for commercial or entertainment purposes, and on printing it on inappropriate objects.
• On November 30, 2016, the Supreme Court issued an interim order requiring all cinema halls in India to play the National Anthem before the start of a feature film. The Court directed that everyone present in the cinema hall must stand to show respect during the National Anthem. The interim order also imposed certain restrictions to ensure respect for the anthem and the National Flag .
• Over time, various stakeholders raised concerns about the practicality and appropriateness of enforcing these rules, especially for physically disabled individuals.

Decision of the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court’s final ruling in this case modified its previous interim order regarding the mandatory playing of the National Anthem in cinema halls. The Court shifted from a mandatory stance to one of discretion, pending the final decision of the Central Government based on the recommendations of a committee that had been constituted to look into the matter.

Key legal issues discussed

1. Whether playing the National Anthem in cinema halls should be made mandatory?

The Supreme Court initially issued an interim order making it mandatory for cinema halls to play the National Anthem before a feature film, with all attendees required to stand in respect. However, following submissions from various stakeholders, the Court reconsidered the practical challenges and the appropriateness of enforcing such a mandate. The Court acknowledged that cinema halls may not be the most suitable venues for fostering a sense of patriotism.

The Court referred to the judgment in Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala [1] , where it had previously dealt with the issue of respect for the National Anthem. In Bijoe Emmanuel, the Court had held that compelling individuals to act in a manner that contradicted their religious beliefs, such as standing for the National Anthem, violated their fundamental rights under Articles 19(1)(a) and 25 of the Constitution. The Court emphasized the importance of respecting the National Anthem but also recognized that respect can be shown in different ways depending on the circumstances.

In paragraph 30 , the Court emphasized the need for respect for the National Anthem but stated that such respect should be demonstrated as per the guidelines formulated by the government. The Court acknowledged that different places and contexts might require different approaches: “When we consider the perspectives put forth before us pronounced in their own way, we have no shadow of doubt that one is compelled to show respect whenever and wherever the National Anthem is played. It is the elan vital of the Nation and fundamental grammar of belonging to a nation state.”

Ultimately, the Court decided to modify its earlier directive by making the playing of the National Anthem in cinema halls optional rather than mandatory until the government made a final decision.

2. Should disabled persons be exempt from standing during the National Anthem in cinema halls?

The Court acknowledged that certain individuals, particularly those with physical disabilities, may not be able to comply with the standing requirement during the playing of the National Anthem. In its earlier orders, the Court had already clarified that disabled persons were exempt from standing, provided they showed respect in a manner commensurate with their abilities.

The Court specified the categories of individuals exempted from the standing requirement. The Court directed that the persons who are wheel chair users, those with autism, persons suffering from cerebral palsy, multiple disabilities, parkinsons, multiple sclerosis, leprosy cured, muscular dystrophy and deaf and blind be treated not to be within the ambit of the orders passed by the Court. This exemption will remain in effect until the government could provide specific guidelines through the committee .

3. Does the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971 cover all aspects of showing respect to the National Anthem?

No The petitioner argued that while the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971 penalizes disrespect to the National Anthem, it does not fully define how respect should be shown. The Court noted that although the Act prohibits certain acts of disrespect (such as preventing the singing of the anthem or causing a disturbance), there was a need for comprehensive guidelines or amendments to provide clarity on various aspects of respect for the National Anthem.

The Court quoted observed Section 3 of the 1971 Act, which prohibits disturbances during the National Anthem, and added that this provision is a penal measure that whoever intentionally prevents the singing of the Indian National Anthem or causes disturbances to any assembly engaged in such singing shall be punished with imprisonment upto three years, or with fine, or with both. The Court left it to the committee to decide whether amendments were needed to the 1971 Act or whether new executive instructions were necessary.

Considering the arguments, the Supreme Court initially mandated the playing of the National Anthem in cinema halls, but after reviewing practical concerns and legal precedents, modified its earlier directive to make the playing of the anthem optional.

[1] AIR 1987 SC 748.

Yousuf Khan

Related posts.

READ MORE 2 months ago

READ MORE 4 months ago

READ MORE 1 year ago

top Trending posts

Study Notes: Winding Up of Companies

Case Study: Bar of Indian Lawyers through its President Jasbir Singh Malik v. D. K. Gandhi PS National Institute of Communicable diseases and Anr.

Study Notes: Doctrine of Constructive Notice

Case Study: Salomon v. A. Salomon and Co. Ltd.

Case Study: Badshah v. Urmila Badhshah Godse and another

Case Study: Ruben and Anr v. Great Fingall Consolidated and Ors

Case Study: Mahony v. East Holyford Mining Co.

Case Study: Dev Kishan and Ors v. Ram Kishan and Ors.

Case study: Arshnoor Singh v. Harpal Kaur and others

Dalit Horrors Remembrance Day: Commemorating the weeks into 75th Independence Day

Decoding Fashion Industry: Need for Fashion Law

Legal Wires is an Online Electronic Media Portal, dedicated to Public Education and Critical Legal Analysis of the trending discourses of National and International importance.

• Ask Lex AI 🤖✨
• Human Rights
• Constitutional Law
• Competition Law

Copyright © Legal Wires 2020

• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions