Passing The Buck: After Delhi Hotel Fire That Killed 21, Same Script Plays Out

The deadly fire in a hotel in South Delhi's Malviya Nagar that claimed 21 lives has triggered another round of buck-passing, as usual.

The Delhi government will scrap its Bed and Breakfast (B&B) policy and conduct a review of all establishments operating under the scheme, Tourism Minister Kapil Mishra has said.

But can the buck stop only with property owners Lovkesh Bajaj and Jai Mishra?

The bigger question is how a building that investigators now describe as riddled with violations operated for years in plain sight - a hotel, a B&B and a restaurant in the name of 'tea stall'.

The B&B was effectively a death trap. Where were the authorities responsible for regulation, inspections and oversight? And if multiple violations had allegedly accumulated over time, how did no agency spot or act on the red flags before 21 lives were lost?

This also isn't the first time. From Karol Bagh to Mundka to Vivek Vihar and now Malviya Nagar, Delhi's deadliest fires have repeatedly exposed the gap between regulations on paper and enforcement on the ground. Violations in plain sight.

Read | Body In Wheelchair, Couple's Last Hug: The Human Face Of Delhi Hotel Tragedy

The Inspection Question

Speaking to NDTV, Tourism Minister Kapil Mishra said, "It is impossible that nobody knew. Someone, somewhere was definitely aware of what was happening at the property. There were too many alleged illegal activities to have gone completely unnoticed. A magisterial inquiry is needed and accountability must be fixed wherever it lies."

Under the B&B scheme, Flourish Stay had the permission to operate only six rooms but it was operating 26 rooms. Officials familiar with the B&B policy said the establishment got permission for six rooms in 2024 and its licence was due for renewal in 2027.

"The Bed and Breakfast policy was originally introduced around the Commonwealth Games to promote tourism by allowing homeowners to host guests in residential properties. Under the policy, establishments operating in residential buildings below 15 metres in height were not required to obtain a fire NOC, as they were not considered commercial entities. Owners were required to submit guest details to the local police station every 15 days, but clearly that didn't happen as required," a senior official in the tourism department said. NDTV has reached out to DCP South with this query, the copy will be updated once a response is received.

Officials also pointed out that routine inspections under the scheme had been done away with "for the ease of doing business".

"While the property was registered as a B&B, it was operating as an entire hotel, with online bookings being accepted as hotel and additional activities such as a restaurant and PG-type accommodation functioning from the premises," the official said, adding that the Tourism Department had nothing to do with the hotel operations and the restaurant.

Read | Delhi Hotel Owner Drove Past Burning Building, Didn't Stop 'Out Of Fear'

Officials also maintained that action could be taken only if a complaint was received, raising questions about how the property's alleged expansion beyond the approved six-room limit went undetected.

"Even if the inspection would have taken place, it would be for the B&B. The tourism department had nothing to do with the hotel operations or the restaurant/tea stall. This definitely puts questions on the MCD and the Delhi Police," the official added.

Delhi Fire Services Chief Fire Officer Abhilash Kumar Malik told NDTV that the application for a Fire NOC comes through the MCD. "It is a 20-pointer application that has to be filled based on which NOC is issued or rejected," Malik said.

The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) has argued that it had limited jurisdiction because the property falls within a Lal Dora area, where certain buildings constructed before 2014 are protected from regular municipal building norms.

Some civic officials also claimed that they were unaware of the full-scale restaurant - Snacks and Bites - allegedly operating from the premises because the owner had only sought a Tatkal licence for a tea stall in 2023, under the purview of all MCD Health Trade licenses, that is to be renewed annually. This category officials said does not require physical inspection before approval. Instead, a full fledged restaurant with cylinders was operating there.

Fire officials said that the preliminary probe suggests that the fire may have started in the ground floor kitchen.

Questions to Anil Yadav, press information director, MCD, remained unanswered till the time of publishing of this report. The story will be updated once the response is received. Municipal Health Officer Ashok Rawat declined to answer questions and directed that all questions be sent to the spokesperson.

Incidentally, on the morning of the fire, a request was submitted to renew this "tea stall" license as well which had expired earlier this year, an MCD official confirmed to NDTV. The instant (Tatkal) license was issued on the day of the fire, sources said, since the process is automatic. It was cancelled after the fire broke out. 

"Public Health Inspectors are responsible for these checks. It is not known if violations were found during these random inspections because ideally if a violation is found, then it's reported and the license is cancelled," a senior MCD official said.

Fire, Arrest, Bail

For victims' families, the blame game is unlikely to provide answers. What remains clear is that multiple agencies had some role to play at different stages whether through licensing, registration or guest verification. Yet, none detected or halted the alleged violations before disaster struck.

Read | Delhi Heroes Let Go Of Lakhs Worth Of Mattresses To Save Guests From Fire

The questions emerging from Malviya Nagar fire are not new.

Over the past decade, nearly every major fire tragedy in Delhi has exposed allegations of regulatory lapses, missing clearances, illegal alterations, or inadequate inspections. In each case, arrests followed swiftly. Accountability, however, has often moved at a much slower pace, with accused out on bail and matters in pre-trial stage.

For instance in the Karol Bagh fire of 2019 that killed 17. The owners of hotel Arpit Palace were arrested but they were granted bail by the courts, and the trial is yet to begin. In the Mundka building fire of 2022 that left 27 dead, too, the owner Manish Lakhra as well the Harish and Varun Goyal, who had rented the three floors, were arrested and got bail. The Delhi Police didn't file a chargesheet within the stipulated time period of 60 days.

"Therefore, considering the allegations made in the FIR, the statements given by the various witnesses and the admitted fact that the father of the petitioners also died in the said unfortunate incidence of fire and also the fact that the petitioners also got burn in same fire, it cannot be stated that the allegations made were in relations to offences falling under Part I of Section 304 IPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder). The same, therefore, were required to be investigated within a period of 60 days from the first day of detention of the petitioners and non-filing of the same gave an indefeasible right to the petitioners to be released on default bail on their exercising their right by filing an application on 16.07.2022," the court said while granting bail to Harish Goyal.

In the Vivek Vihar neonatal care centre fire where eight newborns lost their lives, Dr Naveen Khichi, owner, was arrested by the police, but he too was granted bail after the court noted that the "exact cause of fire could not be ascertained".

"The petitioner was not present at the hospital at the time of the incident; and the circumstances in which the unfortunate deaths have occurred show that neither "intention" nor "knowledge" as required under section 304 IPC can be imputed to the petitioner; and the question of alleging offences under section 304/308 IPC (attempt to commit culpable homicide (not amounting to murder)) against the petitioner does not arise," the court had noted while granting bail.