For 26-year-old Rishabh Mishra, the images of the afternoon of June 22 will always haunt him — people jumping from a burning building or clinging to live wires in an attempt to survive. One in particular refuses to fade: a man pleading from a window, his face flushed and his eyes desperately seeking help as flames raged behind him.

It was around 2:30 p.m. when Mishra, a bystander, noticed the fire in a three-storey commercial building in Sector D in Aliganj, Lucknow. The building housed a pet shop and a clinic on the ground and first floor, a video gaming zone and 3D art and design animation centre named Head Hoppers Studio on the second floor, and an IT networking office on the third floor.

Editorial | Viksit and Surakshit: On the Lucknow fire

Mishra says he immediately swung into action. “I made two trips to the King George’s Medical University (KGMU) — once by car and once by ambulance — ferrying injured people,” he says.

Despite having gone to the hospital twice, a visibly exhausted Mishra cannot recall the route when he gets ready to go the third time, this time on his bike. “I was just focused on getting people there. I didn’t notice the way,” he says. Taking a sip of water from a bottle for the first time after nearly three hours, he asks a police constable how to get to the premier medical institute, 5 kilometres away.

The fire claimed 15 lives, most of them students and staff of the animation centre, while nine others sustained injuries and were admitted to the KGMU Trauma Centre. As per the the post-mortem reports, the 15 of them did not have major burn injuries; they suffocated to death.

On the same day, the Uttar Pradesh government formed a two-member Special Investigation Team to conduct an impartial and time-bound investigation into the fire incident. The team has been instructed to submit its report within seven days.

The Lucknow fire is yet another addition to India’s summer of fire tragedies. Early this month, a fire in a bed-and-breakfast took the lives of 23 people in South Delhi’s Malviya Nagar; last month, nine people were killed in a major fire which broke out at a residential building in Shahdara in East Delhi. In all these incidents, violations of safety guidelines and administrative negligence have been the causes.

No room to escape

A First Information Report filed by the Uttar Pradesh police says that a short circuit may have originated in the air conditioning duct on the first floor or the pet shop located on the ground floor.

According to Abhishek Pandey, an eyewitness who tried to enter the building but was forced to retreat due to the clouds of smoke, the fire spread rapidly across the upper floors. “There were no emergency exits. The only staircase in the building was obstructed by the thick smoke. Some people took refuge in washrooms to evade the fire,” says Pandey.

A survivor says the digital lock of the animation centre was non-functional amid a power shortage. This left students and staff trapped. He adds that the route to the roof was blocked, forcing some people to leap in panic from windows.

Pandey says it took firefighters at least 30 minutes to reach the spot. “Firefighters, police, and SDRF (State Disaster Response Force) personnel arrived to discover that there was no space for evacuation. Unable to access the main entrances, rescue teams had to breach the walls of the building to extract bodies,” he says. Nineteen firefighting vehicles extinguished the fire in about four hours, according to records of the Lucknow Fire and Emergency Services accessed by The Hindu.

Anamika Samanta, an animation artist with three years of experience at Head Hoppers Studio, and Nilesh Kumar were among the 15 people who died in the fire. The two of them were in love and were engaged to be married.

Anamika’s father, Vishwanath Samanta, who lives in West Bengal, is devastated. While collecting her body from the post-mortem facility at KGMU, he wails in anguish. “Our family is shattered,” he says, adding that his wife repeatedly fainted on hearing the news.

Nilesh’s family is distraught too, he says. “We had visited his house 2-3 times earlier,” says Samanta. “We had also met his parents.”

He last spoke to his daughter on the morning of the incident. “She told me, ‘I am going to work now.’ That is the last time I heard her voice.”

Sagar, a 3D artist in training at the institute, was another victim. His friend Rahul Singh rushed to Aliganj after receiving a call from a mutual friend. “Sagar had called my friend and begged him to save him. I reached the spot in 15 minutes, but I could not enter the studio,” he says. “I pleaded with the authorities to drag my friend out. But they told us that they were unable to access the main entrances. Rescue teams had to enter the building from neighbouring buildings to pull out trapped victims. That took a lot of time. Precious time was wasted and my friend died,” says Singh, bursting into tears at the entrance of the post-mortem house in Lucknow.

The Aliganj pet shop and clinic sold pet food, accessories, and habitat supplies and also provided medical and surgical care for pets. It advised owners on the right food and products based on their pets’ breed and age. At least 25 pets, including cats and dogs, were inside the shop when the fire broke out.

“When we received information about the fire on our helpline, our seven-member team reached the spot within 20 minutes. Many animal lovers also gathered at the fire site,” says Shubham Pratap Singh, a member of Jeev Aashraya Foundation, a Lucknow-based NGO that rescues and rehabilitates pet animals. “We pushed for the immediate rescue of pets as cats and dogs are vulnerable to fire disasters due to their inability to adjust to high temperatures. After our efforts, more than 10 cats and dogs were handed over to us. We kept them for a few hours in the house of a man called Vishal Melhotra, who allowed us to use the AC in his house as well. Sadly, some cats who were on the first floor died in the fire.”

Flouting rules

The building where the fire broke out was being used for commercial purposes even though it had been approved by the Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) only for residential use, show the Lucknow Fire and Emergency Services records. According to the FIR, the building also lacked basic fire safety measures, including emergency exits, smoke ventilation systems, fire extinguishers, and other fire protection features.

The building, spread over about 1,992 square feet, was owned by Virendra Pratap Shukla and Surendra Pratap Shukla from January 2013. The LDA approved a residential building plan for the property in 2014 under its self-certification scheme, under which a licensed architect or engineer certifies that the building plan complies with local building bylaws. However, officials later found unauthorised construction on the premises and registered a case against Virendra Pratap Shukla in 2016. Following an investigation, the LDA ordered the illegal portions to be demolished on May 10, 2016, but revoked the order less than two months later, on July 5, raising questions about why the decision was reversed.

An enquiry by the LDA into the incident found 18 officials and engineers of the Authority, many of them retired now, guilty of regulatory lapses linked to the building.

So far, four people — Virendra Pratap Shukla, the owner; and Suresh Kumar Sahu, Ramkrishna Upadhyay, and Tushak Krishna Jaiswal, all of them tenants occupying different floors of the building — have been arrested. They were booked under Sections 105 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder), 110 (attempt to commit culpable homicide), and 125 (rash or negligent act endangering human life) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Fire and Emergency Services Act, 2022. Four officials — Gaurav Kumar, Executive Engineer (Collection), Jankipuram; Kamlendra Kumar Singh, Fire Station Second Officer, Indira Nagar; Anil Kumar, Assistant Engineer; and Pramod Pandey, Junior Engineer — have been suspended.

Singh issued a statement accusing higher officers of making him a scapegoat and demanded that Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath fix accountability on the Lucknow chief fire officer for the lapses linked to the incident. He sought a review of the disciplinary action taken against him. Later, he retracted his statement.

Inspection drive

Following the fire, the LDA launched a citywide inspection drive on June 23 to identify and take action against buildings and establishments operating in violation of safety and building regulations. They sealed 71 establishments and issued notices to 83 building owners/managers on the first day of inspection.

An LDA official said, “This campaign, conducted on the instructions of LDA Vice President Prathamesh Kumar, in collaboration with a joint team of the fire department and the Lucknow police, has targeted dozens of coaching centres, libraries, dance studios, playgroup schools, blood banks, computer institutes, nursing homes, hotels, commercial complexes, and other establishments.” Officials also took similar action in other parts of the State. They say they will carry out the campaign for three weeks.

The U.P. government also directed all the District Magistrates to conduct a comprehensive survey of all the coaching institutes operating in their respective districts to ensure compliance with safety standards. The inspection includes aspects such as building arrangements, fire safety, electrical safety, and other necessary facilities.

Yogendra Upadhyay, Higher Education Minister in the State government, said in an official statement, “All District Magistrates have been directed to conduct a comprehensive survey of all coaching institutes operating in their respective districts and prepare a list. Strict action, as per rules, is being ensured against institutions that are not registered under the Uttar Pradesh Coaching Regulation Act, 2002.... Any kind of irregularity or negligence will not be tolerated.”

The opposition Samajwadi Party (SP) criticised the government and administrative authorities. “The safety of students and citizens is paramount. But initiating a sudden drive after such a tragedy... shows an attempt to hide failure and corruption,” said Udai Veer Singh, an SP spokesperson. “Safety shouldn’t be compromised. Why was the government asleep for the past 10 years? Where did the government get so much staff in a single day to issue notices to thousands of people across the State after conducting inspections?”

Singh said a massive fire in April had damaged a labourers’ settlement near Sector-12 in Vikas Nagar, Lucknow. “We had demanded strict implementation of safety protocols then too, but no action was taken,” he said.

The way forward

Vineet Singh, a police officer in the State police force, who spent a decade serving in Lucknow, suggests a practical approach to the crisis. Many buildings were constructed decades earlier when upgraded safety protocols were not in place, he says. “We need to retrofit old buildings with modern fire safety solutions. There may be structural limitations as some older structures were not designed to house modern systems such as smoke detectors or sprinklers, but wireless fire alarms are ideal for retrofits as they reduce extensive wiring challenges,” he says.

Singh adds that sprinkler retrofits can use flexible systems, which are easier to install in tight spaces. “Fire-resistant coatings can be applied to structural elements without altering the appearance, and retrofitted fire doors with self-closing mechanisms can improve evacuation safety,” Singh says. “We need to develop retrofit plans that balance safety standards with architectural preservation.”

In older buildings, emergency evacuation can be improved by upgrading to LED exit signs and photoluminescent wayfinding markings. Around the world, many retrofit projects also involve installing wireless fire alarm and sprinkler systems in multi-storey residential buildings constructed decades ago without modern fire safety measures, he adds.

mayank.kumar@thehindu.co.in