Telangana HC questions delay, seeks detailed Sigachi probe
The Telangana High Court stressed that the ongoing criminal investigation into the Sigachi accident must move forward independently of any committee findings, ensuring that accountability is not diluted or delayed. The bench made it clear that government authorities should not view the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) as a confrontation, but rather as an opportunity to initiate systemic reforms that could prevent similar tragedies in the future. The court emphasised prioritising transparency, accountability, and urgency in addressing the lapses that led to the mishap.
lives of at least 46 workers. The tragedy, one of the worst industrial disasters in the state in recent years, has left behind grieving families still searching for justice and accountability.
During the latest hearing, a division bench headed by Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh directed multiple government departments to submit detailed affidavits within three weeks. These reports must clearly outline the sequence of events leading to the blast, the present status of the probe, the safety lapses identified, actions taken against those responsible, and the extent of compensation released to the victims’ families.
The PIL, filed by retired scientist K. Baburao, had urged the court to order an independent Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe, pointing out that mere committee inquiries would not suffice. He stressed that the victims’ families deserved timely compensation and that those responsible for negligence must face strict punishment.
The bench also sought clarity on the industrial and environmental laws applicable in the case and asked for a detailed breakdown of the compensation paid so far. Importantly, the judges underlined that the criminal investigation must proceed independently of any committee reports, warning the state government not to treat the PIL as an adversarial move but as an opportunity to initiate much-needed systemic reforms.
In its counter affidavit, the state government informed the court that a high-powered committee and an expert panel were constituted soon after the explosion. However, the final reports of both committees are still awaited. This delay, the bench observed, only deepens concerns about accountability.
So far, 43 death certificates have been issued, with three more pending. Yet, no arrests have been made till date—a fact that has added to the anguish of the victims’ families, many of whom remain in financial and emotional distress.
The High Court has now posted the matter for further hearing at the end of August, making it clear that it expects not only accountability for this tragedy but also stronger industrial safety regulations to prevent such devastating incidents in the future.