Mumbai Sessions Court Discharges Jolly Maker 1 Society In 2012 Fire Safety Violation Case

Mumbai, July 6: The sessions court discharged Jolly Maker 1 Premises Co-op. Soc. Ltd. and two of its former office-bearers, who were being prosecuted for alleged non-compliance with firefighting norms that allegedly led to a delay in extinguishing a fire in December 2012. The court said that the Fire Department had not followed the mandatory legal formalities before launching the prosecution.

Challenge To Magistrate's Order

The society and its former office-bearers — Laxman Agarwal, Bhavnesh Sawhney, Taher Adenwala, Parminderkuldip Oberoi, Pishu Mehtani, and Mahesh Lalvani — had approached the sessions court against the order of the magistrate court refusing to discharge them from the case.

This all started with a fire that broke out on December 2, 2012, at 3.30 am. The fire is said to have originated in a flat on the 19th floor, allegedly due to a short circuit. No casualties or injuries were reported, and about 28 people were rescued. After the incident, the Fire Department carried out an inspection and submitted a report.

Fire Department's Findings

In the report, it was alleged that the fire could not be controlled because of the non-maintenance of firefighting equipment and the failure to submit certificates from a licensed agency to the Chief Officer in January and July 2012. It was further alleged that the manual call point and fire alarm had been removed without informing the Fire Department.

Based on the report, a notice was issued to the society, which also submitted a reply. However, the officer said that as the reply was not found satisfactory, a criminal complaint was filed before the metropolitan magistrate court.

Based on the complaint, a warrant trial was initiated, at the end of which the magistrate court issued notice to the society and its office-bearers for framing of charges, rejecting their plea for discharge.

Court Finds Procedural Lapses

The society and its office-bearers contended that the firefighting system was in working condition and that there were contradictions in the testimony of two officials. It was also contended that the report only dealt with the cause of the fire incident. After the report, an inspection was carried out without the mandatory prior notice three hours before the inspection.

Also Watch:

The sessions court accepted the contention of the society and its former office-bearers and discharged them, observing: “In absence of compliance of mandatory provisions the entire prosecution fails. To reiterate that this prosecution is not for fire call or loss of life in fire but for contravention of measures for firefighting. Thus, the evidence of the prosecution does not bring on record the required legal formalities to take prosecution against the accused.”

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/