KARACHI: A judicial magistrate has rejected the final investigation report in last year’s Keamari gas leak incident and directed the SSP-Investigation to appoint an ‘honest’ officer to re-investigate the matter, which claimed the lives of at least 18 people, including children.
According to the prosecution, multiple FIRs were registered at the Mochko police station under Sections 322 (punishment for qatl-bis-sabab), 284 (negligent conduct with respect to poisonous substances), and 34 (common intention) of the Pakistan Penal Code by residents of Ali Muhammad Goth near Suparco Road.
The complaints were filed against the owners of several plastic factories operating illegally in the area. These factories, lacking proper environmental safeguards, released toxic fumes and hazardous chemicals, leading to the deaths.
In her detailed order, Judicial Magistrate (West) Madiha Arif directed the SSP-Keamari Investigation to appoint “an honest and experienced police officer,” not below the rank of DSP, to re-investigate the case impartially, ensuring transparency and accountability within 14 days.
Rejects IO’s report, directs SSP to appoint ‘honest and experienced’ officer for reinvestigation
“No innocent person should be implicated, and no guilty individual should escape the clutches of the law. Given the circumstances, I do not agree with the conclusions reached by the investigation officer,” the court observed.
The court noted that the investigating officer (IO) failed to fulfil necessary legal requirements. “The report is unlawful and contrary to the principles of natural justice,” the order stated, adding that the IO’s conclusions were inconsistent with the law.
The investigation officer had submitted a final report, which was rejected on the grounds that the investigation “solely focused on the factory owners as the accused.” The court observed that the IO failed to include key departmental authorities and officials whose oversight failures and systemic negligence were directly linked to the incident.
The court emphasised that the land on which the factories were operating was designated for residential purposes. It noted: “No permits or no objection certificates had been granted or obtained for operating a factory or conducting commercial activities on this site.”
The court also criticised the lack of action by relevant authorities against the unauthorised godowns and factories in the residential area. It noted that although the IO sent letters to 17 concerned authorities and departments, only a few responded, while the rest neither replied nor conducted inspections or sealed the illegal establishments. Additionally, no follow-ups were made during the investigation.
The exhumation report revealed the presence of ‘phthalates’ (plasticisers)“ and rubber additives in the bodies of the deceased, indicating prolonged exposure to synthetic materials in environments lacking adequate chemical controls.
The court observed that “certain individuals, departments, and authorities significantly responsible for the tragic incident were excluded from the investigation”.
It criticised the apparent tendency to shield these entities from accountability, despite their roles in allowing illegal factories to operate on residential property.
The court highlighted that establishing any factory requires adherence to specific legal obligations, which were neglected in this case. It termed this neglect as ‘gross negligence’ on the part of those responsible.
“All concerned departments, authorities, and individuals failed to ensure the factories were properly registered, further confirming that they were operating illegally at the time of the incident,” the court observed and added that the lack of regulatory oversight reflected recklessness and negligence by the authorities, who appeared complicit in permitting illegal operations.
The court concluded that the inaction of the relevant authorities contributed to the tragedy, as they failed to comply with mandatory environmental and safety protocols.
Published in Dawn, December 12th, 2024
