Present: TARIQ PERVEZ and GULZAR HUSSAIN Syed Jawaid Haider Kazmi vs
This matter arises from a petition filed in-person concerning the operation of a business involving inflammable articles in a residential building, which the petitioner alleged posed a severe fire hazard and risk to the lives of the inhabitants. The core legal question addressed by the court was whether the apprehension of a future fire hazard resulting from a lawful business operating under statutory clearances constitutes an actionable offence or warrants judicial intervention to halt the trade. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that a mere future apprehension of fire does not constitute an offence, noting that the respondents' business was lawful and possessed necessary clearances from the Civil Defence Authority, which had taken adequate preventive measures. The court ultimately dismissed the petition while issuing binding directives requiring the respondents to strictly adhere to safety measures and obtain a renewed clearance certificate from the Civil Defence Authority every six months, to be prominently displayed on each shop.
- Does a mere apprehension of a future fire hazard resulting from a business constitute an offence?
- Can a lawful business possessing necessary licences and safety clearances from the Civil Defence Authority be restrained based on general apprehensions?
- What mandatory safety directives can the court issue to mitigate risks associated with businesses dealing in inflammable materials?
ORDER
' TARIQ PERVEZ, J. --- The petitioner, who has appeared in-person, states that the respondents are running dangerous business in the building and their trade also includes articles highly inflammable. According to him, such business trade if allowed to continue, the inhabitants of the building, who are occupying their residence, their lives are at risk because even in the past, at number of occasions, fire broke out in the building due to such articles/materials.
2. We have asked the learned Additional Prosecutor General, appearing in this matter, that is the business being run by the respondents under lawful authority/licence and that is the business being carried on by the respondents is lawful business; his reply was in affirmative. He further states that all humanly possible measures have been taken and would be taken to prevent the breaking out of fire, which includes installation of water showers, chemical showers, etc. He has added that all the shops, running the business of inflammable articles, are registered with the Civil Defence, which is the sole authority and that such authority has issued clearance certificate to the respondents.
3. Keeping in view the above circumstances of the case, we find that at present it is mere apprehension of the petitioner of fire being broken out in future, which cannot constitute an offence; however, the respondents are directed that they shall strictly adhere to all humanly possible resources/efforts to avoid any untoward incident, which is likely to cause danger to the human life. We further direct the respondents that they shall take clearance certificate from the Civil Defence Authority after every six months, which shall be displayed on the face of every shop of the building, running such business.