Karachi Court Grants Interim Bail to 11‑Year‑Old and Four Others in Gul Plaza Fire Case

Karachi: An additional district and sessions judge granted interim bail on Monday to five of the six individuals charged in the deadly Gul Plaza fire, among them the building union president and an 11‑year‑old boy.

The blaze erupted on the night of January 17 at the mall and burned for nearly two days before being brought under control, killing at least 73 people and reducing more than 1,100 shops to ashes.

The charge sheet names six accused: 11‑year‑old Huzaifa; his father, Naimatullah, who operated an artificial‑flower stall; Gul Plaza Management Committee President Tanveer Pasta; and committee members Amar Ismail, Muhammad Ramazan and Muhammad Ameen.

Naimatullah, Pasta, Ismail and Ramazan each secured bail on a surety of Rs 500,000, according to their counsel, Shaikh Jawaid Mir. The minor, Huzaifa, was released on a Rs 10,000 surety.

In his written order, Judge Muhammad Aslam Shaikh noted that the matter required consideration and, without assessing the merits, admitted the applicants to pre‑arrest interim bail. He directed the investigating officer to appear in person at the next hearing on July 14 with the police file and ordered all accused to cooperate with the investigation agency and attend the subsequent court date.

The charge sheet, filed on Saturday, listed all nominated persons as absconders and identified 42 prosecution witnesses. Several witnesses recorded their statements under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code before a judicial magistrate, including 13‑year‑old Aryan, who said he was in Huzaifa’s shop when the boy was playing with matchsticks and the fire erupted. His account was corroborated by eyewitnesses Mohammad Talha and Hamza Amir, who stated that Naimatullah routinely left the shop in the care of his underage son.

Call‑data records showed that Naimatullah was not present at the shop at the time of the incident. The sheet also highlighted serious safety deficiencies: exit routes were locked or blocked, fire extinguishers and safety equipment were inadequate, no fire hydrant system existed, and emergency backup lighting was absent after the power supply was cut off by the fire. Furthermore, the CDR of the management committee members revealed no calls to fire or rescue services, indicating negligence on their part.

Source link