1997 The Supreme Court gave an important order in the case of the gift cinema accident. The court has asked for inspection of the trauma centers which have been produced from the amount recovered from the cinema owner Ansal brothers. The court gave this order on the petition of the gift tragedy, the Sangh (Association of Victims of Gift Tragedy). The institution had alleged that the court order in 2015 has not been followed properly.

What is the matter?
On 13 June 1997, 59 people died in a fire in Delhi’s gift cinema hall. Ansal Bandhu was the owner of this cinema hall. In 2007, the lower court sentenced them to 2 years, convicting both of them for negligent. This sentence was reduced to 1 year by the High Court. Later, the Supreme Court imposed a fine of 30-30 crores from the two brothers (Gopal and Sushil Ansal) and termed the sentence spent so far sufficient. According to the court order, this amount was to be used for the construction of a trauma center (special hospital for treatment of accident victims) in Delhi.

Petition of the Sangh Sangh
Association of Victims of Gift Tragedy (Avut) It has been said that the Ansal brothers did not fulfill the responsibility of building these trauma centers despite reducing their punishment. Delhi Electricity Board (Dvb) Wanted to give 5 acres of land, but that too has not been given. On this, the court sought a response from the Delhi government on the status of the trauma centers.

What did the government say?
It was told by the government that the amount of 60 crores recovered as a fine was inadequate for the construction of the trauma center. The government has also developed 3 hospital trauma facilities including Indira Gandhi Hospital in Dwarka by investing a lot of money from its side. Of these, the center of Dwarka is now in a complete current position.

What did the court say?
The bench of Justice Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuiyan and N. Kotishwar Singh said, “It is necessary to ensure that the trauma centers are not only for the name. They have 24 -hour emergency facilities available in them.” The court asked the victim Sangh to give the name of its representative who joined the site visit. The court admitted that a fine of Rs 60 crore ‘Peanuts’ (There was a very minor amount). The court said to the petitioner raising the question of 5 acres of land that the center that has been built is built on government land.

What information did you ask for?

According to the court order, this will be seen in inspection –

• Are the trauma centers operating with doctors and staff round the clock
• Do they have facilities to deal with emergency?
• Are transport and necessary resources available?
• How many patients can this center be handled immediately?

The court has also sought information on the status of 5 acres of land allocation. The court has indicated that if it finds deficiencies, it can issue new orders. This may include things like additional funding, monitoring committee and time-limiting time limit for construction of trauma center.