\n<\/p>\n
KARACHI: A Karachi city court on Wednesday rejected a plea by Gul Plaza president Tanveer Pasta<\/span><\/span><\/span>\u00a0and other co-accused seeking the formation of a Joint Investigation Team (JIT), observing that JITs are constituted exclusively for terrorism cases.<\/strong><\/p>\n The city court continued its hearing on the Gul Plaza fire case, where Tanveer Pastan and other accused appeared before the bench.<\/p>\n Defense counsel Javed Mir argued that despite previous court orders to include government institutions in the probe, the new Investigating Officer (IO) attempted to shield government organizations.<\/p>\n He pointed out that no action was taken against the builder by the Sindh Building Control Authority (SBCA), while a clean chit was given to the Karachi Metropolitan Corporation (KMC), SBCA, and the Fire Brigade.<\/p>\n Furthermore, he noted that the IO failed to record the statement of the Deputy Commissioner (DC) South.<\/p>\n Mir informed the court that although the fire erupted on the ground floor, a father and son were named as accused despite the father not even being present at the scene.<\/p>\n He added that while around 5,000 people managed to evacuate the building, several individuals were burnt alive due to the severe negligence and incompetence of government institutions.<\/p>\n \u201cDuring the emergency, the fire brigade did not even have water, but the IO completely ignored this point,\u201d Mir said, adding that trapped victims cried for help for an hour and a half while government agencies failed to act.<\/p>\n Countering these arguments, the IO stated that there were 16 exit doors on the ground floor, which prevented fatalities on that level, and alleged that building management had installed fixed steel windows that blocked escape routes.<\/p>\n Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) Amir Wirck informed the court that Civil Defence was included in the investigation and statements from two of its officers were recorded.<\/p>\n He contended that the management was responsible for safety as they collected fees from shopkeepers, adding that despite management claims that no one was trapped, victims were indeed burnt alive.<\/p>\n When the IO claimed that official teams had broken open doors and windows to rescue occupants, Javed Mir refuted the assertion, stating that the doors and windows were actually broken open the following day.<\/p>\n Mir remarked that the charge sheet (challan) made it appear as though DSP Amir Wirck had decided the matter unilaterally.<\/p>\n He stressed that the investigating officer failed to inquire into a single point among the seven directives previously highlighted by the court for re-investigation.<\/p>\n When the court asked why government institutions were not named as accused in the case, the defense counsel replied that Tanveer Pastan had brought all relevant facts to the authorities\u2019 attention, questioning what crime his client had committed.<\/p>\n Speaking directly to the court, Tanveer Pastan stated that victims remained alive inside the building for two and a half hours after the fire broke out. He noted that five of his own team members lost their lives in the blaze, yet there is no mention of them in the challan.<\/p>\n Pastan added that a rescue snorkel malfunctioned during the operation; had it worked properly, precious lives could have been saved.<\/p>\n He stated that ordinary citizens rescued him from the flames, without whom he would have died.<\/p>\n He expressed frustration over being framed as an accused despite losing his own people, adding that Rs 7 billion in compensation was distributed to fire victims upon his recommendation.<\/p>\n The hearing adjourned till September 18.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n