Questionable investigation into resort fire that killed 10 in Cox’s Bazar

Ten people dead. Much of a three-story resort reduced to ashes. Multiple theories about the cause of the fire but no definitive conclusion. A tourist accommodation business was operating without the necessary fire safety and environmental clearances. Yet after such a major disaster, the name of one of the two owners was not included in the case filed over the incident. Lawyers have also questioned the charges brought in the case. The main accused and resort owner Tanvir Sultan Mia is absconding. No clear information about the other owner, Niaz Morshed, is available.

These are among the questions emerging one after another following the deaths of 10 tourists in a fire at TupTup Restaurant and Resort beside Patuartek Beach in Ukhia, Cox’s Bazar. Questions remain about the origin of the fire, the building’s safety measures, the operation of an unauthorized business and the responsibility of its owners. No definitive answers have emerged so far. As a result, concerns are growing over transparency and accountability in the investigation into the deaths of 10 people.

The fire broke out at the resort beside Marine Drive on the morning of Saturday, October 17. The three-story building is located about 31 kilometers south of Cox’s Bazar town. Tourists were staying in eight rooms on the second and third floors. The ground floor housed a restaurant and accommodation for staff. The fire destroyed the building’s wooden floors, walls and stairs as well as an extension of the restaurant. The bodies of 10 people were later recovered from the site.

According to Ukhia Police Station Officer in Charge Atiqur  Rahman, information obtained during the interrogation of the arrested assistant manager and the preliminary investigation indicates that the fire started from an electrical short circuit in a refrigerator on the ground floor. As the fire spread, a gas cylinder in the kitchen exploded.

However, police have not confirmed whether this was the definitive cause of the fire. Rimón Ghosh, a sub inspector at Ukhia Police Station and the investigation officer in the case, said different accounts of how the fire started had emerged. He said more time would be needed to determine the actual cause.

Police suspect that flammable chemicals stored in the resort’s warehouse may have contributed to the rapid spread of the fire. Strong winds and the building’s wooden structure may also have accelerated its spread. However, detailed information about the types of chemicals stored in the warehouse has not been obtained.

An investigation committee formed by the district administration has also inspected the site. A member of the committee, speaking on condition of anonymity, said an electrical short circuit followed by a gas cylinder explosion had emerged as the preliminary explanation. The details would be included in the full investigation report.

Gias Uddin, who owns a tea and coffee shop beside the resort, said he heard a loud noise on the morning of the incident and went outside, where he saw the resort on fire. People were running around at the time. A refrigerator and some wooden parts of his shop were also destroyed in the fire. Mohammad Aziz, Ansar and VDP commander of Jaliapalong Union, also said he heard a sound resembling an explosion. However, neither of them could confirm the source of the noise.

Built on about 20 decimals of land, much of the resort’s room floors, walls and stairs were made of wood. An extension of the restaurant facing the road had been constructed on wooden posts. These structural features played a devastating role in the spread of the fire and the loss of life.

The fire has raised serious questions about the resort’s approvals and safety measures. According to relevant sources, the establishment was operating with only a trade license issued by Jaliapalong Union Parishad. It did not have the necessary approvals from the Fire Service, the Department of Environment or the Cox’s Bazar Development Authority.

According to Union Parishad records, the trade license was issued in the name of Tanvir Sultan Mia on July 22. His address was listed as Mirpara in Boalkhali, Chattogram. The license is valid from July 1 this year through June 30 next year. A total of Tk 2,000 was collected in license fees, value added tax and commercial tax.

Jaliapalong Union Parishad Chairman SM Chhaeyed Alam said trade licenses are issued to businesses operating in the union area after collecting the prescribed fees. He said the same procedure had been followed for TupTup Resort. However, it emerged after the fire that the establishment lacked other necessary approvals.

Although the business had a trade license from a local government institution, an important question is who was responsible for verifying whether it had the necessary fire safety arrangements and other approvals to accommodate tourists. In particular, the investigation needs to establish whether the residential resort had adequate arrangements for tourists to evacuate safely in the event of a fire, as well as proper emergency exits and firefighting equipment.

Meanwhile, the resort’s website lists the names and photographs of Tanvir Sultan Mia and Niaz Morshed in its “About” section. Both are identified as owners. However, while Tanvir Mia is named in the case filed over the deaths of 10 tourists, Niaz Morshed is not.

According to the first information report, the accused include resort proprietor Tanvir Sultan Mia, chief manager Saeed Ahmed, manager Mohammad Saeed and assistant manager Zahid Hossain Sumon. Police said 19 other unidentified people were also named as accused. Ukhia Police Station Sub Inspector Ashish Sutradhar filed the case on October 17. Sub Inspector Rimon Ghosh is investigating the case.

Asked why the name of one of the two owners had been omitted, Officer in Charge Atiqur Rahman said police initially learned the name of one owner and named him as an accused. The name of the other owner emerged later. He said anyone else found to be involved during the investigation would be included in the case. He added that collecting documents, including the trade license, had become difficult because the resort’s papers were destroyed in the fire. Efforts were underway to collect records from the Union Parishad and other sources.

Asked about Niaz Morshed’s role, investigation officer Rimón Ghosh said the investigation was ongoing and it was not possible to provide further details at this stage.

Tanvir Sultan Mia, the main accused, has been absconding since the incident. A police officer involved in the investigation claimed that he was currently in Indonesia. No clear information was available about the whereabouts of the other owner or other people involved. So far, assistant manager Zahid Hossain Sumon is the only person arrested in the case. Police have applied to take him into seven days of remand, but the remand hearing has not yet taken place.

After reviewing the first information report, lawyer Sezan Ehsan raised questions about the selection of accused and the charges brought in the case. In his view, it is necessary to carefully examine whether a charge of causing death through negligence alone is sufficient in an incident involving so many fatalities.

He said the investigation should focus on whether the necessary approvals were obtained and fire safety and environmental regulations were followed in constructing and operating the resort. The first information report should also clarify the roles of the owners and the responsibilities of the employees.

He said authorities could also have considered adding Sections 285 and 436 of the Penal Code and Sections 18 and 19 of the Fire Prevention and Extinguishing Act. However, no explanation was available from the complainant or the relevant officials about why these provisions had not been included in the case.

There are also discrepancies between accounts provided by relatives and police regarding the exact number of tourists staying at the resort when the fire broke out. This has created uncertainty over whether anyone remains missing in addition to the 10 people who died.

According to relatives, 21 tourists, including women and children, were staying at the resort on the night of October 16. By the following morning, Irene Jahan and Israt Jahan had gone to the beach, leaving 19 people at the resort when the fire broke out.

According to the relatives’ account, the bodies of 10 people were recovered, six injured people were admitted to hospitals and two survived by jumping from the building. Based on their count, one person remained missing.

However, Officer in Charge Atiqur Rahman claimed that preliminary investigations and information provided by the arrested assistant manager indicated that 19 guests were staying in eight rooms when the fire broke out. Of them, 10 bodies were recovered, seven injured people received hospital treatment and two escaped by jumping. He said the investigation had found no information indicating that anyone else among the 19 guests was missing. No written claim had been submitted on the matter either.

Tasnim Jahan, additional district magistrate and head of the district administration’s investigation committee, said the possibility that one more person was missing emerged after the recovery of 10 bodies. The Fire Service subsequently conducted another search but found no additional body. She said the matter was being taken seriously.

HM Nazrul Islam, member secretary of Cox’s Bazar Nagorik Andolon, said the TupTup Resort fire was not merely a fire at a single establishment. It also raised questions about licensing requirements for tourism related businesses, fire safety oversight, determining the owners’ responsibility and transparency in the investigation.

He said answers could emerge by determining the actual cause of the fire, resolving discrepancies in the missing person count and bringing those responsible to justice. Whether accountability will be ensured over the deaths of 10 tourists remains the central question.