Justice, Negligence and a City's Grief: The Gul Plaza Fire Trial Comes to Karachi's Courts

The devastating Gul Plaza Shopping Centre fire that shocked Karachi earlier this year has moved into a new and sobering phase, as a court charge sheet names six accused — including a child — and raises urgent questions about safety, parental responsibility and institutional negligence.

⚖️ Charge Sheet Filed Against Minor and Five Others

A charge sheet submitted to court names six individuals in connection with the Gul Plaza fire, including an 11-year-old boy identified as Huzaifa and his father Naimatullah, who owned an artificial flower shop inside the building. Four members of the Gul Plaza Management Committee are also named as accused. The investigating officer filed the charge sheet through the district prosecutor, marking a formal step toward trial proceedings. The fire broke out on January 17, leaving eight people injured and destroying more than 1,100 shops in the commercial complex. [1]

🔥 Local Media Reports Charge Sheet Details in Deadly Blaze

Local media coverage confirmed that an 11-year-old boy has been charged in connection with the Gul Plaza fire, one of the deadliest commercial disasters in recent Karachi history. The charge sheet, as reported, names both the minor and his father among the accused, alongside members of the plaza's management committee. The fire, which broke out at the shopping centre, resulted in a catastrophic loss of life and property. The case has drawn wide attention across Pakistan and the wider region. [2]

🧒 Eyewitness Accounts Place Child at Centre of Tragedy

According to the charge sheet, eyewitness testimony recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code alleges that the fire erupted after the 11-year-old boy was seen playing with matchsticks inside the shop. A 13-year-old witness named Aryan reportedly gave a statement before a judicial magistrate describing the moment the fire started, and two additional witnesses — Mohammad Talha and Hamza Amir — also provided supporting accounts. Call data records cited in the charge sheet indicate the boy's father was not present in the shop at the time. The management committee members face allegations of negligence for failing to enforce safety regulations and allowing an underage person to operate the premises unsupervised. [3]

Sources: [1] Dawn · [2] Khaleej Times · [3] Gulf News