Deesa fire tragedy: Gujarat High Court permits impleading warehouse owners as respondents in PIL

In an oral order dated November 25, made available on Tuesday, the Division Bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice D N Ray noted the submissions made by the petitioner in the Deesa fire case.

The court order noted the petitioner’s submissions that the warehouse owners allegedly manufactured fireworks on the premises without the requisite licenses from the authorities.

“It is contended that, though the license ultimately has not been renewed by the State Authorities, the labourers were brought to Deesa on March 29, 2025, by the accused persons, two days before the fire tragedy. The labourers were instructed to always keep the shutters of the factory down to avoid detection by one contractor, namely Pankaj, who had also lost his life in the tragedy,” the court order noted.

“The forensic investigation conducted by the Forensic Science Laboratory revealed that the explosions were caused by the presence of aluminium powder and a bag full of yellow dextrin powder, both critical ingredients in firecracker manufacturing.”

Response from state departments

The court has sought replies from the Gujarat Pollution Control Board (GPCB) “to bring before the Court the role played by GPCB, if any, in the running of the manufacturing unit and storage of fire crackers illegally, which may also concern the environmental issues.”

The director, Industry, Safety and Health, also a respondent in the case, is stated to be “personally answerable” to the court “as to the manner in which the industry in question was permitted to run in the industrial area of Deesa in District Banaskantha in violation of all safety norms,” the order said.

The court order also states, “The question about the role of the Directorate of Fire Prevention Services of the Directorate established under the Gujarat Fire Prevention and Life Safety Measures Act, 2013, would be looked into after the response of all other respondents is received.”

The petitioner has implored the court to consider the transfer of the investigation into the case to police officers from outside Gujarat, and raised the issue of the non-compliance of fire safety norms as per the provisions of the Explosive Substances Act,1908, the Explosives Act, 1884, and the Gujarat Fire Prevention and Life Safety Measures Act, 2013.

The petitioner has also emphasised the need for proper monitoring and regulation of firecracker manufacturing industries and warehouses in the state of Gujarat, and has sought the SIT’s report to be presented to the court.

Advocate Utkarsh Dave, appearing for the families of the Deesa fire victims, told The Indian Express, “Gujarat has seen multiple tragedies in the past that have caused loss of lives due to negligence of authorities and repeated failure of the state officials working in the state government”.

“Our petition also importantly raises the issue that the compensation in such cases should be enhanced to ensure a life of dignity to the kin of the victims, if not closure in the matter… We have also sought an inquiry to be conducted by officers from outside Gujarat so that the state government officers responsible for the tragedy are not given scope to escape the law…”