FIRs lodged into Ghaziabad fire incident
Following the fire in a Raj Nagar building on May 14 that resulted in the death of five Indiamart employees, the police on Tuesday registered two FIRs — under sections of causing death by negligence and cheating — at teh Kavi Nagar police station.noida Updated: May 18, 2016 01:24 IST
Following the fire in a Raj Nagar building on May 14 that resulted in the death of five Indiamart employees, the police on Tuesday registered two FIRs — under sections of causing death by negligence and cheating — at Kavi Nagar police station.
Senior police officials said that the first FIR was lodged against the officials of Indiamart, building owner Radhey Shyam Sharma and his son Rajnish, who operated a property consultancy office on the first floor, where the fire started.
“The sub-inspector, who is the in-charge of the local police post, lodged the first FIR under sections of cheating and causing death by negligence. Primarily, we lodged an FIR for negligence as the building was under residential land use but used for commercial purposes. During the fire, the roof door was also locked and the stairs were narrow to escape. The victims had no way to escape,” Manish Mishra, circle officer (city), said.
“We also received a complaint from family of Ritam Dwivedi (one of the deceased). They complained that there was no proper fire safety arrangement in the Indiamart office. Upon the complaint, a second FIR was lodged against the officials of Indiamart for causing death by negligence (304a of IPC),” he said.
The spokesperson for Indiamart said that their teams were sent to the Kavi Nagar police station to obtain information about the FIRs. “We have come to know about the two FIRs and will take proper legal recourse. Meanwhile, we have also compiled out a complete fact sheet about the incident and our team will hand it over to the Ghaziabad police,” the spokesperson said.
On Monday, the spokesperson for Indiamart had said that two fire extinguishers were in place in their second floor office. “There was no fire in our office but it was covered with thick smoke and poisonous gases due to the fire on the first floor. In the agreement, the building was declared as a property for commercial use,” the spokesperson had told HT on Monday.
Rajnish had earlier told HT that there was only one fire extinguisher in the building, which was placed inside the common toilet on the first floor. He denied knowledge of the FIR and said that an FIR was uncalled for as the incident was accidental and did not have any criminal intent.
“The FIR is not acceptable and we will seek legal advice over the issue. The building is in my father’s name. He is 68 years old and is very upset about the incident. He has been confined to bed rest as he had a surgery a couple of months back and his health is in a bad shape. Also, the roof door was not locked but latched during the incident,” he said.