Gul Plaza union challenges police investigation into deadly fire

KARACHI: The Gul Plaza Traders’ Union has challenged the police investigation into the devastating fire at Gul Plaza, alleging that the inquiry has been mishandled and calling for an independent investigation.

The devastating fire that broke out and engulfed Gul Plaza on the night of January 17, claimed dozens of lives, and continued for more than 32 hours before it was brought under control.

Union representatives claimed the building was reduced to ashes due to the negligence of government departments, rather than any fault on the part of those affected.

The petitioners have urged that the investigation be conducted jointly by the police and the country’s security agencies to ensure a transparent and impartial inquiry.

According to the petition, the police investigation has treated victims of the incident as suspects. The application was filed by Tanveer Pasta and other petitioners.

Counsel for the petitioners further alleged that the police investigation had even named a child as a suspect. The petition seeks a review of the ongoing investigation and a fair determination of responsibility for the incident.

Charge sheet

Karachi police have submitted the charge sheet in the Gul Plaza fire case to the prosecution. However, sources said the findings of the Gul Plaza Judicial Commission were not included in the charge sheet.

The investigation concludes that the fire was accidental, a finding supported by the forensic report. Police have named shopkeeper Naeematullah as the primary accused, along with his 11-year-old son, Huzaifa.

The charge sheet also names Gul Plaza Market Committee President Tanveer Pasta, Vice President Ammar Ismail, General Secretary Muhammad Ameen, and Joint Secretary Muhammad Ramzan as accused. Investigators have declared all of the accused absconders.

According to the report, the fire claimed the lives of 72 people, while the remains of four victims have yet to be claimed. Statements from four eyewitnesses were recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

A forensic analysis conducted by the Punjab Forensic Science Laboratory found no evidence of explosive materials, confirming that the blaze was not caused by an explosion.