Two Clusters of Anggrek Train and KRL Collision: Taxi Driver and Train Driver Named Suspects
The Metro Jaya Regional Police have named the driver of the Anggrek train (formerly KA Argo Bromo Anggrek) as a suspect after a collision with a KRL commuter train at Bekasi Timur Station, which resulted in 16 fatalities. In addition to AN, an electric taxi driver identified by the initials RRP has also been named a suspect due to negligence that triggered the accident near Bekasi Timur Station.
According to reports on Tuesday (29/09/2026), the accident occurred at Bekasi Timur Station on 27 April 2026, at 20:52 WIB. In total, there were 123 victims in the accident, consisting of 107 injured persons and 16 deceased.
At the time, two separate incidents occurred. First, there was a collision between a KRL train travelling from Tambun Station and an electric taxi at the level crossing on Jalan Ampera. This accident occurred at 20:48:24 WIB.
This initial accident caused a crowd of residents to gather, blocking the tracks towards Tambun Station. This situation forced the KRL train heading to Tambun to remain stationary at Bekasi Timur Station for an extended period.
The KRL, which was stopped at Bekasi Timur Station, was subsequently struck by the Anggrek train travelling from Bekasi Station. This collision occurred at 20:52:12 WIB.
Taxi Driver Named Suspect in KRL Collision at Jalan Ampera Level Crossing
Police have investigated the incident and named the electric taxi driver, RRP, who was struck by the KRL at the level crossing near Bekasi Timur Station, as a suspect. The driver was deemed negligent in triggering the collision with the KRL.
During the accident, the electric taxi had come to a halt in the middle of the railway tracks not far from Bekasi Timur Station due to an electrical short circuit. Despite being named a suspect, the taxi driver is not being detained.
“That is correct. We have designated the taxi driver as a suspect,” stated the Head of Traffic Unit of Bekasi Kota Metro Police, Commissioner Gefri Agitia, to reporters on Thursday (21/05/2026).
Gefri stated that the suspect is charged under Article 310, paragraph 1 of Law Number 22 of 2009 concerning Road Traffic and Transport (LLAJ), which carries a penalty of 6 months imprisonment or a fine of Rp 1 million. As the potential sentence is below five years, the driver is not being detained.
“Under Article 310, paragraph 1, but no detention is being carried out against the driver. Why? Because the threat of punishment is below 5 years. The accident caused by negligence resulted in material loss. The threat is 6 months in prison with a fine of Rp 1 million. That has been our decision,” he said.
Police assessed that the taxi driver was negligent in the incident, and this negligence caused the taxi to collide with the KRL.
“The negligence lies with the driver, RR,” said Gefri.
Police have also transferred the taxi driver’s case to the prosecutor, with the handover completed on Thursday (10/09).
Anggrek Train Driver Named Suspect
Most recently, the Metro Jaya Regional Police announced that the driver of the Argo Bromo Anggrek train, AN (37), has been named a suspect. AN is believed to have applied the brakes too late, leading to the fatal accident.
“Based on the results of the data and investigative evidence we have conducted, as you have also seen from the data logger results, it was found that the emergency brake action performed by the driver of the Argo Bromo Anggrek train at 21:51 WIB occurred when the train was 263 metres from the point of impact with KRL 5568,” said the Deputy Director of Criminal Investigation, Metro Jaya Regional Police, AKBP Dewa Anom Danunjaya, on Tuesday (29/09/2026).
“Investigators concluded that the emergency brake action should have been performed at a greater distance than the action taken during the first braking at the time of the accident,” he continued.
He stated that investigators had conducted examinations and analysed evidence, noting that they had also consulted with experts.
“So, while the driver did perform the action, the distance at which it was performed should have been further than the 263-metre distance recorded at the location,” he said.