MAPUSA
More than two months after the devastating blaze at Birch by Romeo Lane, the 4,350-page chargesheet filed by Anjuna Police has raised as many questions as it claims to answer.
While former Arpora-Nagoa panchayat secretary Raghuvir Bagkar and ex-sarpanch Roshan Redkar are the only two public officials named as accused in the chargesheet in connection with the deadly fire that claimed 23 lives in the basement alone, no other government officials have been arraigned – despite serious questions over how the controversial nightclub secured multiple permissions.
Suspensions without prosecution
In the immediate aftermath of the tragedy, the State government had moved swiftly to suspend then Director/Additional Director of Panchayats Siddhi Harlankar and the then Member Secretary of the Goa State Pollution Control Board Shamila Monteiro. The nightclub had received key permissions during their respective tenures.
However, neither Harlankar nor Monteiro figure as accused in the chargesheet.
Police sources confirmed that both officials were questioned during the course of the investigation.
“We have called both the officials for inquiry and taken their statements which are attached to the chargesheet,” a senior police officer associated with the probe said.
Their statements form part of the voluminous chargesheet as annexures. Yet, investigators stopped short of naming them as accused.
Both officials continue to remain under suspension.
The CRZ clean chit
Equally intriguing is the role of the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA). Barely two weeks before the fatal fire, GCZMA’s Member Secretary Sachin Desai had concluded that the structures housing the high-end nightclub did not fall within the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ), effectively ruling out any violation under coastal laws.
The finding was significant because the property is widely believed to be located on or near a salt pan – a category of land that typically attracts environmental scrutiny.
Desai’s conclusion that the structures were “entirely legal” under CRZ norms had paved the way for the club’s continued operations.
Permissions through dubious means?
According to documents reviewed during the investigation, several approvals granted to the nightclub are alleged to have been obtained through questionable representations and procedural shortcuts.
Yet, beyond the panchayat-level functionaries, no higher-level scrutiny appears to have translated into criminal liability.
Legal observers point out that in cases involving regulatory clearances, culpability often extends beyond the final signatory.
“Approvals don’t materialise in isolation. Files move through multiple desks. If there were irregularities, accountability must be traced along the entire chain,” said a senior advocate familiar with regulatory prosecutions.
Investigation under lens
Though the chargesheet has now been placed before the trial court, the probe itself is coming under scrutiny.
Critics argue that the investigation appears to have focused narrowly on local-level functionaries while avoiding a deeper examination of institutional responsibility.
Police officials maintain that the charges are based strictly on available evidence.
“The investigation is evidence-driven. Whoever against whom sufficient material was found has been named,” an officer said.
Yet, the conspicuous absence of certain names – especially those who were administratively suspended in the wake of the disaster – has intensified debate over whether accountability in the Birch fire tragedy has truly climbed the ladder, or stopped at its lowest rung.
