Source : INDIA TODAY NEWS
A devastating fire at a hotel on Mirza Ghalib Street in Kolkata’s New Market area has once again exposed a troubling fault line in the city’s urban safety mechanism—the gap between rules on paper and enforcement on the ground.
The fire, which broke out post-midnight on August 19 and claimed at least nine lives, has triggered questions not only about what caused the blaze but also about how a hotel operating in one of the city’s most congested areas was allowed to function with allegedly inadequate safety arrangements.
advertisement
Initial assessments have pointed towards an electrical fault, with police examining the switchboard and air-conditioning system as possible sources. Firefighters have said the blaze may have originated on the second floor before spreading rapidly. The forensic investigation is expected to establish the precise cause.
The human toll has added another dimension to the tragedy. According to the Bangladesh Deputy High Commission in Kolkata, five of the nine confirmed dead were Bangladeshi nationals. Four of them were residents of Kushtia district and members of the same family while another was from Aminbazar in Dhaka.
The identity of one Indian national has also been confirmed while authorities were still working to establish who the remaining victims were. Six injured people were reportedly discharged after receiving initial treatment while others remained under medical care.
The Bangladesh Deputy High Commission responded quickly, with Md Khaled—the deputy high commissioner—visiting both the scene and hospitals to assist in identifying the victims and ensuring medical treatment for the injured. It also announced a 24-hour helpline and said arrangements would be made to repatriate the bodies of Bangladeshi nationals once identification procedures were completed.
The incident has inevitably acquired a political dimension. Chief minister Suvendu Adhikari expressed grief over the deaths but went beyond condolences to accuse the previous Trinamool Congress government of having allowed a culture of regulatory negligence to develop over many years. His argument is that hotels and other commercial establishments were permitted to operate in congested buildings without adequate fire-safety infrastructure while inspections and safety drills were not conducted with the necessary regularity.
“Shocked and anguished by the tragic fire incident at the hotel on Mirza Galib Street in Kolkata. While we remain focused on the rescue and relief operations and conduct investigation regarding what went wrong, it is impossible to ignore the reality we are facing today,” Adhikari’s statement read.
Adhikari argued that the tragedy reflected what he described as years of administrative failure. He has promised stricter enforcement of safety regulations and ordered the administration to ensure that injured victims receive appropriate treatment. A five-member special investigation team has been constituted.
The political criticism, however, has to be considered alongside the larger institutional question. Fire safety in Kolkata is not an issue that began with one government or one political party. The city’s record over the past two decades suggests a recurring pattern. Fires have repeatedly exposed problems involving building use, electrical installations, emergency exits, overcrowding, combustible materials, licencing and enforcement.
The history is sobering. In November 2006, nine people died and 18 were injured in a fire at a leather factory in Topsia, where workers reportedly had only one exit available to them. In March 2010, the Stephen Court fire on Park Street killed 43 people and injured hundreds. The December 2011 AMRI Hospital fire in Dhakuria claimed 93 lives, many of them patients who were unable to escape. A fire at a paper and plastic market on Surya Sen Street in Sealdah killed 20 workers in February 2013. In March 2021, nine people, including firefighters and railway and police personnel, died in the New Koilaghat Building fire on Strand Road.
More recently, the Mechua Bazar hotel fire of April 2025 killed 14 people, including two children, and injured 13. The January 2026 Anandapur warehouse fire resulted in a major recovery operation lasting around 72 hours, with missing-person reports filed for 27 people and 18 sets of remains initially identified. The precise death toll in that case remained unclear.
These incidents complicate any attempt to reduce Kolkata’s fire-safety problem to the failures of a particular political administration. Governments have changed, but many of the underlying vulnerabilities have remained. After major fires, arrests, inspections, committees and new directives often follow. Yet the recurrence of similar tragedies suggests that the problem lies in the consistency of enforcement.
That is precisely why the response from the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (KMC) following the New Market fire is significant. KMC commissioner Smita Pandey has ordered the affected hotel to remain closed indefinitely and announced that special committees will inspect commercial establishments, hotels, markets and public gathering spaces across all 16 boroughs. The inspections are scheduled to begin on August 25, with preliminary reports expected within a month.
The proposed exercise is also broader than a conventional fire-safety inspection. Representatives of the KMC, Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority, Kolkata police, fire and emergency services, and Calcutta Electric Supply Corporation are expected to participate. The civic body’s licencing department has also been brought into the process.
Pandey acknowledged there may have been shortcomings in the civic body’s own monitoring process. A detailed report has reportedly been sought from the building department on where the system failed and whether lapses were allowed to remain undetected. At the same time, she has stressed that hotel and business operators also have an obligation to comply with safety rules and maintain safe premises.
That point is important. A credible investigation therefore needs to examine the entire chain of responsibility. The reported absence or inadequacy of fire alarms, emergency exits and evacuation assistance, if established by the investigation, would raise particularly serious questions. A building may technically possess safety installations, but those measures are of limited value if exits are inaccessible, alarms do not function, staff are untrained or guests cannot find a safe route out.
The political debate has already reflected this tension. Adhikari has blamed the previous administration but critics of this line of argument are likely to ask a simpler question: if the current administration now controls the city’s regulatory machinery, why were unsafe establishments not identified before a tragedy occurred?
That is where the forthcoming investigation will be important. If the authorities establish that the hotel lacked mandatory safety arrangements, the next questions should be equally specific: which licences had been issued, by which departments, when was the premises last inspected, what deficiencies had previously been recorded, whether those deficiencies were corrected, and whether anyone within the regulatory chain failed to act. The answers would reveal whether the failure was an isolated violation or evidence of a broader breakdown involving multiple agencies.
The police investigation is also expected to examine the role of the hotel owner, who has reportedly gone missing. Several people have reportedly been detained and questioned while forensic experts are examining the origin and spread of the fire.
For Kolkata, the central issue is therefore not simply why the Mirza Ghalib Street hotel caught fire. The more consequential question is why a fire, once started, was able to become a fatal disaster. Kolkata has learned this lesson repeatedly, often at enormous human cost. The city has seen investigations, regulatory campaigns and promises of stricter enforcement one tragedy after another. What remains to be demonstrated is whether the latest response will survive beyond the immediate political and public attention.
The tragedy has once again placed Kolkata’s densely built commercial neighbourhoods under scrutiny. The challenge now is to ensure that the 16-borough inspection exercise does not become another temporary administrative response but produces a transparent, enforceable system in which licences, building use, electrical safety, fire preparedness and evacuation arrangements are regularly checked and violations carry consequences.
The victims and their families deserve more than condolences, political accusations or another investigation report. They deserve an answer to the most basic question raised by this tragedy: could these deaths have been prevented, and if so, why were the necessary safeguards not in place? Only a thorough and independent investigation can answer that question credibly. And only sustained enforcement, rather than another round of post-tragedy inspections, can determine whether Kolkata’s long history of deadly fires is finally beginning to change.
Subscribe to India Today Magazine
– Ends
SOURCE :- TIMES OF INDIA
