GPS and InSAR derived evidences of intra‐basin stress and strike‐slip tectonics in the vicinity of 2001 (M7.7) earthquake, Kachchh, western India

Abstract

The current geodetic investigation is based on nearly a decade of continuous Global Positioning System (GPS) data towards the western part of the Indian Plate (2009–2019). This research focused on the Kachchh Rift Basin (KRB), the seismically most active intra‐plate region of the Indian Plate, which has seen three ≥ M 7.0 earthquakes in the last two centuries. The GPS stations on the northern and southern margins show SSW and NNE directed motion, indicating that the KRB is currently under the influence of regional compressive stress on both flanks and the same is reflected in the form of earthquake activity in the center portion. Furthermore, the existence of intra‐basin stress, in addition to regional stress, increases strain accumulation and results in the creation of a Principal Deformation Zone (PDZ) in the central part of the KRB. The average annual deformation in the middle of KRB remains 1.0 ± 0.5 mm/year, while sites near the South Wagad Fault (SWF) experience 1.2 mm/year of fault parallel motion. The dominant fault normal motion along the flanks with a maximum fault parallel motion in the middle intimates the existence of strike‐slip tectonics in the central Kachchh. The geometric relationship of strike‐slip faults in a compressive margin and strain accumulation in pre‐existing faults (PDZ) is responsible for current strike‐slip and thrust motion in the Kachchh, including the 2001 Bhuj earthquake (M 7.7). Our geodetic model is well‐corroborated with the geological observations of the wrench fault model of strike‐slip faults. PS‐InSAR results in the northern part of the region between Khadir and Bela Islands show ≤6.0 mm of annual LOS displacement. GPS results indicate ≈ 1.3 to 1.4 ± 0.5 mm/year of fault parallel motion along the transverse Ekal Amrapar Fault (EAF). The non‐significant variation in GRACE‐derived TWS values (from 2009 to 2018) rules out non‐tectonic deformation in the vicinity of EAF and thus points to tectonic activity as the cause of the derived deformation in the region.