Karachi Gul Plaza Fire Case Takes New Turn As Accused Get Bail

KARACHI: A district and sessions court in Karachi has granted interim bail to five accused persons in the Gul Plaza fire case, including an 11-year-old boy and senior members of the market’s management committee, in a development that has reopened debate over accountability in one of the city’s deadliest commercial fires.

The order was issued on Monday by Additional District and Sessions Judge Muhammad Aslam Shaikh after the accused approached the court for pre-arrest relief. The case is linked to the massive blaze that erupted at Gul Plaza in January and caused catastrophic loss of life and property in the city’s commercial hub.

According to the case record, the nominated accused include the minor boy Huzaifa, his father Naimatullah, who owned an artificial flower shop, and Gul Plaza Management Committee President Tanveer Pasta. Committee members Amar Ismail, Muhammad Ramazan and Muhammad Ameen were also named in the charge sheet.

The court granted interim bail to Naimatullah, Tanveer Pasta, Amar Ismail and Muhammad Ramazan against surety bonds of Rs500,000 each. The minor accused was granted bail against a surety bond of Rs10,000, while the investigating officer was directed to appear at the next hearing with the complete police file.

In its written order, the court observed that the arguments raised by the applicants required consideration at this stage. The judge allowed interim protection without making a final finding on the merits of the allegations and instructed the accused to cooperate with investigators and attend the next hearing.

The Gul Plaza fire broke out on the night of January 17 and took nearly two days to fully extinguish. The blaze killed at least 73 people and destroyed more than 1,100 shops, leaving traders, workers and families facing deep financial and emotional losses long after the flames were put out.

The charge sheet states that the child was allegedly present in the shop when the fire began, while witness statements claimed that he had been playing with matchsticks. Investigators also alleged that his father was not present at the shop at the time, and that the building’s management had failed to ensure basic fire-safety arrangements.

Police further cited blocked or locked exit points, insufficient fire extinguishers, absence of a fire hydrant system and lack of emergency backup lights as factors that worsened the disaster. The investigation also claimed that committee members did not make timely calls to rescue services after the fire spread.

For Karachi, the case carries significance beyond the fate of the accused because it touches a wider civic crisis: unsafe commercial buildings, weak enforcement of fire codes and delayed emergency response. Traders’ groups have challenged parts of the investigation, but victims’ families and the public continue to demand clarity over who failed to prevent such a heavy loss of life.

The next hearing on July 14 will be closely watched as the investigating officer is expected to bring the police file before the court. The proceedings may determine whether the case moves toward formal trial, further investigation or revised legal arguments over responsibility for the Gul Plaza tragedy.