Is Suvendu Adhikari Seeking Permission to Visit the Gutted Kolkata Warehouse?
Synopsis
Suvendu Adhikari seeks to visit the site of a tragic warehouse fire in Kolkata. With 21 confirmed dead and many still missing, he accuses the state government of negligence. Will the Calcutta High Court grant him permission amidst police restrictions?
Key Takeaways
Suvendu Adhikari petitions for site visit amid restrictions.
Tragic warehouse fire claims 21 lives .
Police deny protest permission citing safety concerns.
Eyewitness criticizes delayed fire response.
Calcutta High Court to hear the petition soon.
Kolkata, Jan 29 (NationPress) The Leader of Opposition (LoP) in the West Bengal Assembly, Suvendu Adhikari, has approached a single-judge bench of the Calcutta High Court on Thursday, requesting authorization to visit the site of the devastated warehouse in Anandapur, situated on the southern outskirts of Kolkata. The site has become a tragic scene where the remains of 21 individuals have been recovered, while several others remain missing.
Adhikari's petition comes after police enforced prohibitory orders within a 100-metre radius of the burned warehouse, following his announcement to protest at the site, accusing the state government of negligence.
The petition has been acknowledged by the single-judge bench presided over by Justice Suvra Ghosh. The date of the initial hearing has yet to be communicated.
Previously, the LoP sought permission from the police to visit the location and organize a protest. However, the local Narendrapur Police Station denied this request, citing concerns over potential traffic disruptions affecting nearby schools and hospitals.
Additionally, the police reiterated the prohibitory orders, which were issued to safeguard evidence, impede any interference with the investigation, and facilitate rescue operations.
Adhikari has criticized the timing of these prohibitory orders, claiming they were implemented four days post the fire incident solely to obstruct his access to the site. “It’s not unusual for me to face denial of police permission for my initiatives, only to end up seeking redress from the Calcutta High Court,” he stated.
On Thursday, the first eyewitness who reported the fire to emergency services disclosed to reporters that the calamity could have been averted had the state fire services responded swiftly, instead of adhering to jurisdictional protocols.
The eyewitness, Virendra Yadav, who operates a cattle shed adjacent to the Pushpanjali Decorators warehouse, where the fire originated before spreading to the nearby Wow Momo warehouse, was the first to alert the fire services. Yet, when he dialed 101, his call was redirected to the district control room, which delayed immediate assistance by instructing him to reach out to the Kolkata control room.
Point of View
The situation surrounding the Calcutta High Court petition by Suvendu Adhikari highlights a significant intersection of political accountability and public safety. The tragic loss of life raises pressing questions about emergency response protocols and governmental responsibility. As the situation unfolds, it is crucial that the voices of those affected are heard and addressed by the authorities.
NationPress
10 May 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
What prompted Suvendu Adhikari to approach the Calcutta High Court?
Suvendu Adhikari sought permission to visit the site of a warehouse fire where 21 individuals died, amid police-imposed restrictions.
What reasons did the police provide for denying Adhikari's protest?
The police cited concerns about traffic congestion affecting nearby schools and hospitals as the reason for denying permission.
What was the eyewitness's account of the fire incident?
The eyewitness claimed the tragedy could have been avoided with a quicker response from the fire services.
What is the current status of the court petition?
The petition has been accepted by the Calcutta High Court, with the date for the first hearing yet to be announced.
How has Adhikari reacted to the police's prohibitory orders?
Adhikari criticized the timing of the prohibitory orders, suggesting they were issued to obstruct his access to the site.
