Uphaar Cinema fire

Last updated

Uphaar Cinema fire
Date13 June 1997 (1997-06-13)
Location Green Park, Delhi, India
Causedue to suffocation, stampede
Non-fatal injuries103

The Uphaar Cinema fire [1] was one of the worst fire tragedies in recent Indian history. [2] The fire started on Friday, 13 June 1997 at Uphaar Cinema in Green Park, Delhi during the three o'clock screening of the movie Border . [3] Fifty-nine people were trapped inside and died of asphyxiation, while 103 were seriously injured in the resulting stampede (suffocation).


The victims and the families of the deceased later formed The Association of Victims of Uphaar Fire Tragedy (AVUT), [4] which filed the landmark civil compensation case. It won 25 crore (equivalent to 51 croreorUS$7.1 million in 2019) in compensation for the families of the victims. [5] The case is now considered a breakthrough in civil compensation law in India. [6] [7] However, on 13 October 2011, the Supreme Court nearly halved the sum of compensation awarded to victims by the [Delhi high court], and slashed punitive damages to be paid by cinema owners, the Ansal brothers, from 2.5 crore (equivalent to 4.1 croreorUS$580,000 in 2019) to 25 lakh (equivalent to 41 lakhorUS$58,000 in 2019). [8]

In its final order on August 25, 2015, the Supreme Court modified its earlier order [9] and sentenced the Ansal brothers to a two-year jail term if they failed to pay the families of the victims Rs.30 crore each within three months. [10] The Supreme Court reviewed this order again on February 9, 2017, and sentenced Gopal Ansal to a year in jail for the case. The other accused, Sushil Ansal, did not have to serve a further more sentence because of his old age. [11]

The fire incident

On June 13, 1997, at about 6.55 a.m., the bigger of the two transformers installed and maintained by DVB on the ground floor of the Uphaar Cinema building caught fire. At around 7 a.m, an explosion was heard by the security guard, Sudhir Kumar, who then discovered smoke in the transformer room. The fire brigade and the Delhi Vidyut Board (DVB) were informed and the fire was brought under control by 7.25 a.m. Inspection of the transformer by the Superintendent of the DVB and his team revealed that three of the low tension cable leads of the transformer had been partially burnt. At around 10.30 a.m., inspectors from DVB and Senior Fitter conducted repairs on the transformer by replacing two aluminum sockets on the B-Phase of the low tension cable leads. The repairs, it appears, were carried out with the help of a die and hammer, and without the use of a crimping machine. DVB completed their repairs between 10:30 a.m. and 11 a.m. The transformer was recharged for the resumption of electric supply by 11.30 a.m. on June 13, 1997.[ citation needed ]

It is alleged that repairs conducted on the transformer in the earlier part of the day were unsatisfactory and resulted in loose connections that caused sparking on the B-Phase of the transformers. This resulted in the loosening of one of the cables of the transformer, which eventually came off and started dangling loose along with the radiator and burnt a hole in the radiator fin. Through this hole, the transformer oil started leaking out which, on account of the heat generated by the loose cable touching against the radiator, ignited the oil at about 4.55 p.m. on 13 June 1997. Since the transformer did not have an oil soak pit, as required under the regulations and the standard practice, the oil that spread out of the enclosure continued leaking and spreading the fire to the adjacent parking lot where cars were parked at a distance of no more than a metre from the door of the transformer. The result was that all the cars parked in the parking area on the ground floor of the cinema hall were ablaze. Smoke started billowing in the northern and southward directions in the parking lot of the cinema complex. The northern bound smoke encountered a gate, which was adjacent to a staircase leading to the cinema auditorium on the first floor. Due to chimney effect, the smoke gushed into the stairwell and eventually entered the cinema auditorium through a door and through the air conditioning ducts. The southward bound smoke similarly traveled aerially through another staircase and into the lower portion of the balcony of the auditorium from the left side. All this happened while numerous of people were seated in the auditorium enjoying the matinee show of ‘BORDER’, a popular Hindi movie with a patriotic theme.[ citation needed ]

Because of smoke and carbon monoxide released by the burning oil and other combustible material, the people in the auditorium started suffocating. The Shift In-charge of the Green Park Complaint Centre of DVB received a telephonic message at the relevant point of time, regarding the fire. It was only then that the AIIMS grid to which the transformer in question was connected was switched off and the flow of energy to the cinema complex stopped. According to the prosecution, the supply of the 11 KV outgoing Green Park Feeder tripped off at 5.05 p.m. thereby discontinuing the supply of energy to the cinema. Inside the auditorium and balcony, there was complete pandemonium. The people in the balcony are said to have rushed towards the exits in pitch darkness as there were neither emergency lights nor any cinema staff to help or guide them. No public announcement regarding the fire was made to those inside the auditorium or the balcony, nor were any fire alarms set off, no matter the management and the employees of the Uphaar Cinema were aware of the fact that a fire had broken out. Even the Projector Operator was not given instructions to stop the film while the fire was raging nor was any patron informed about the situation outside. On the contrary, doors to the middle entrance of the balcony were found to be bolted by the gatekeeper who had left his duty without handing over charge to his reliever. More importantly, the addition of a private 8-seater box had completely closed off the exit on the right side of the balcony, while the addition of a total of 52 extra seats over the years had completely blocked the gangway on the right side of the balcony. Similarly, the gangway on the right of the middle entrance was significantly narrower than required under the regulations. All these obstructions, deviations, violations and deficiencies had resulted in the victims getting trapped in the balcony for at least 10–15 minutes exposing them to lethal carbon monoxide, to which as many as 59 persons eventually succumbed.[ citation needed ]

An off-duty Capt. Manjinder Singh Bhinder of the 61st Cavalry of the Indian army and a talented horse-rider, out celebrating his success at a recent national games with his family and a junior officer at the movie hall, gave his and his family's lives up saving over 150 people, on his personal initiative. Rushing out along with his family at first, realising the gravity of the unfolding tragedy, he and his people went back inside and tried to set order and guide people out to safety. [12] [13] [14] Fire services were delayed due to the heavy evening traffic and the location of the cinema hall, situated in one of the busiest areas of South Delhi. [15] At least 48 fire tenders were pressed into service at 5.20 p.m. and it took them over an hour to put out the fire. [16] Later the dead and the injured were rushed to the nearby All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) and Safdarjung Hospital, where scenes of chaos and pandemonium followed, as relatives and family members of the victims scurried around to look for known faces. [17]

Causes and fire violations

The enquiries [18] done by the Law commission of India, the Delhi Fire department, the Naresh Kumar committee, [19] the Dy. commissioner of Police and the CBI [20] found a number of fire code violations [21] [22] including the following:

The investigation and trial

In the beginning a magisterial probe (judicial review) took place which submitted its report on 3 July 1997, wherein it held cinema management, Delhi Vidyut Board, city fire service, the Delhi police's licensing branch and municipal corporation responsible for the incident saying "it contributed to the mishap through their acts of omission and commission", [26] it also blamed the cinema management for losing precious time in alerting the fire services, and also for not maintaining proper distance between the transformer room and the car park. [27] It also said that, "when the fire broke out at 1645 hours, the movie was not stopped nor any announcement made to evacuate the audience. Exit signs were not battery-operated and once the lights went out, panic-struck people had to grope in the dark for exits, many of which were blocked by seats". [26] Subsequently, the courts issued non-bailable warrants against Sushil Ansal, his brother Gopal, a Delhi Vidyut Board inspector and two fire service officials. After evading arrest for many days, Sushil and his son Pranav Ansal, the owners of Ansals Theatres and Club Hotels Limited, which owned the Uphaar cinema were finally arrested in Mumbai on 27 July 1997, and sent to judicial custody, though were later released on bail. Also amongst those arrested was the company's director V K Aggarwal. [28]

Following the inquiry, Union Home ministry transferred the probe to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) amidst charges by victims' families of cover-up, [28] which on 15 November 1997, filed a chargesheet against 16 accused, including theatre owners Sushil and Gopal Ansal, for causing death by negligence, endangering life and relevant provisions of the Cinematography Act, 1952. By 2000, the prosecution had completed the recording of evidence with the testimony of its 115 witnesses. The court case ran for over a decade, and the court had over 344 hearings during the first seven years. Four of the accused died, [29] and eight witnesses, mostly relatives of Ansals turned hostile witness, [30] despite the High court responding to AVUT's plea and asking the trial court in 2002 to expedite the case. [5] Meanwhile, as the criminal trial dragged on, in 2003, a presiding judge commented upon the repeated requests (for adjournment) as being intended to delay the case. [31]

Almost nine years after the tragedy, a trial court judge visited the Uphaar cinema hall in August 2006, accompanied by CBI officials who investigated the case to get a first-hand look at the seating and fire safety arrangements, which have been blamed for the tragedy. The site had been preserved as "material evidence" since the tragedy. The visit followed a High Court order in which the trial court was asked to examine all available evidence in the matter, as the courts proceeding were coming to an end. In its report the court observed that on the second-floor balcony of the theatre, where victims were asphyxiated, "the space provided for exhaust fans on the walls was found blocked with the help of a cardboard". [32] [33]

Civil compensation case

In a connected civil court case, 'The Association of Victims of Uphaar Fire Tragedy' (AVUT) sought civil compensation from Ansal Theatre and Clubhotels Ltd., which owned the theatre, and the Delhi government alleged 'negligence' on their part led to the fire in the cinema hall. The verdict of this case came on 24 April 2003, and the Delhi High Court found owners of the Uphaar cinema, Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD), Delhi Vidyut Board (electricity Board) (DVB) and the licensing authority 'guilty of negligence', and awarded Rs 25 crore (Rs 250 million) civil compensation to the relatives of victims, [5] which included Rs 15 lakh each to the relatives of the victims, less than 20 years at the time of the tragedy and a sum of Rs 18 lakh each to those, above 20 years. The compensation included Rs.2.5 crore for development of a trauma centre near New Delhi's Safdarjung Hospital, situated close to the cinema hall. [29] The court directed the cinema owners to pay 55 percent of the compensation since they were the maximum beneficiaries of the profit earned from the cinema, the remaining 45 per cent was to be borne equally by MCD, DVB and licensing authorities, each contributing 15 percent of the amount. [34]

The Supreme Court on 13 October 2011 reduced the amount of compensation to be paid to the victims of 1997 Uphaar Cinema fire tragedy. The compensation to the family of deceased above 20 yrs cut from Rs. 18 lakh to Rs. 10 lakh each; for those below 20 yrs, from Rs. 15 lakh to Rs. 7.5 lakh.

Evidence tampering case

In 2003, the public prosecutor in the case reported that several important documents filed along with the charge sheet were missing from the court record of the case or had been tampered with or mutilated. The court ordered an inquiry and dismissed the court clerk. In 2006, the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of the Delhi Police registered the case on a Delhi High Court direction on a petition by 'Association of the Victims of Uphaar Tragedy' (AVUT) convener Neelam Krishnamurthy.

In February 2008, on the basis of the charge-sheet filed by the Economic Offences Wing of the Delhi police for allegedly removing, tampering and mutilating important documents of the Uphaar fire tragedy case in conspiracy with a clerk in a trial court there in 2003, the Delhi court summoned Uphaar cinema hall owners Sushil Ansal and Gopal Ansal and four others in the evidence tampering case, under Sections 120-B (criminal conspiracy), 201 (causing disappearance of evidence or giving false information to screen offenders) and 409 (criminal breach of trust) of the Indian Penal Code .

In short-In the year 2003 the public prosecutor found the important documents along with the charge sheet missing.an inquiry took place and the court officer was dismissed. In 2006 the case was registered on Delhi High Court by EOW of the Delhi Police. In February, 2008 on the basis charge sheet filed by of EOW of Delhi Police for illeagally removing the important documents and charge sheet of the UPHAAR fire case in the conspiracy of a court officer in a trial court in 2003, the Delhi court called the hall owners SUSHIL ANSAL and GOPAL ANSAL and four others in spoiling of evidence , under Sections 120-B,201,409 of theINDIAN PENAL CODE. [35]

The verdict

The final verdict came four years later on 20 November 2007, and the quantum of sentences were given out on 23 November, in which 12 people, including the two Ansal brothers, were found guilty, and later convicted for of various charges including, causing death by negligent act, [36] and were given the maximum punishment of two years’ rigorous imprisonment. They were also fined Rs.1,000 each for violating Section 14 of the Cinematography Act. The court also directed the CBI to investigate the role of other officials who had been giving temporary licenses to the Uphaar cinema hall for 17 years. [37]

The other seven accused, three former Uphaar cinema managers, the cinema's gatekeeper and three DVB officials, were all given seven years' rigorous imprisonment, under Section 304-A (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and housed at the Tihar Jail. [29] [38] The court also fined all the 12 accused with Rs.5,000 each, and also sentenced all of them to two years’ rigorous imprisonment, as they were found guilty of endangering the personal safety of others, both the sentences, however, were to run concurrently. [37] Sources:ABP News But in the court session only the staff and the head was punished and not the DVB superintendent and the DVB labourers. [39]

Post verdict

One year after the verdict, one of the managers, who had allegedly fled from the hall soon after the fire broke out and the fire safety measures were not followed, died at a Delhi hospital on 6 December 2008. [40] In December 2008, the High Court, while upholding the trial court order convicting the Ansal brothers, had reduced their sentences of imprisonment from two years to one year. [41] On 30 January 2009, an Apex bench of the Supreme Court granted bail to Sushil Ansal and Gopal Ansal. [42] On 5 March 2014, the Supreme court upheld the conviction of the Ansal brothers. The apex court further stated that Ansals were more concerned about making money than ensuring the safety of cinema-goers. The issue on the quantum of punishment referred to a three-judge bench in view of the difference in opinion between the two judges who delivered the verdict.

On 26 March 2014, Sushil Ansal left India without seeking permission from the Apex Court. The Supreme Court has expressed displeasure over real estate baron Sushil Ansal, convicted in Uphaar fire case, leaving the country without its permission. The apex court, however, allowed Ansal to stay abroad for medical treatment after he gave an assurance that he would return on 11 April. [43]

Final Verdict

On 19 August 2015, Supreme court of India imposed a fine on Ansal brothers for 30 crores each and held that their jail terms will be reduced to the term already undergone by them if they pay the fine, considering their old age. [44] [45] The court ruled that the lack of a trauma center at the nearby AIIMS hospital had contributed to the high death toll in the incident. [34] However this decision has been criticized by the victims families. [46]


The fire exposed the poor safety standards at public places in the country's capital. [36] [47] This was not the first instance of such a fire. On 6 July 1989, a fire had broken out at Uphaar cinema due to a fault in the substation. After an earlier transformer caused fire at Gopal Towers, a high-rise in Rajendra Place, New Delhi in 1983, the licenses of 12 cinemas, including that of Uphaar, had been canceled. The Deputy Commissioner of Police (Licensing) who inspected Uphaar, had listed ten serious violations, however, all remained uncorrected until the fire 14 years later. [48]

Related Research Articles

The Dabwali fire accident occurred on 23 December 1995 at Mandi Dabwali, a town in Sirsa district, Haryana in India.

Human Rights Law Network

The Human Rights Law Network (HRLN) is a collective of Indian lawyers and social activists who provide legal support to the vulnerable and disadvantaged sections of society. It works on child rights, disabilities rights, rights of people living with HIV/AIDS, prisoners' rights, refugee rights, rights of indigenous people, workers' rights, and rights of the minorities and people who have faced or are subject to sexual violence, among others.

K. Kalimuthu was an Indian politician of the Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and Member of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly. He served as the Speaker of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly from 2001 to 2006. He was elected to the state Assembly 5 times and held posts as the Minister for local administration one term and as Agriculture minister for two terms under Dr. M. G. Ramachandran as chief Minister, was the Member of Lok Sabha once and Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly speaker once. He was an M.A in Tamil. He gained a doctorate (Ph.D) in Tamil for his literary works and wrote books and poems in Tamil. K. Kalimuthu was born in Ramuthevanpatti, Virudhunagar district, Tamil Nadu.

Green Park, Delhi Neighborhood of Delhi in South Delhi, India

Green Park is a neighbourhood in South Delhi, India. The locality is divided into two parts i.e. Main and Extension. The neighbourhood registered a 4.4% growth in residential sales and was recently featured alongside Greater Kailash, Defence Colony, Vasant Vihar and Anand Niketan in the 2019 edition of Knight Frank 's quarterly report on prime luxury residential properties in various megacities around the globe.

Colin Gonsalves

Colin Gonsalves is a designated Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court of India and the founder of Human Rights Law Network (HRLN). He specializes in human rights protection, labour law and public interest law. He has been awarded Right Livelihood Award for the year 2017 for "his tireless and innovative use of public interest litigation over three decades to secure fundamental human rights for India’s most marginalised and vulnerable citizens." Considered a pioneer in the field of public interest litigation in India, he has brought several cases dealing with economic, social and cultural rights. Most of these cases, decided by the Supreme Court, have been set as precedents.

Nambi Narayanan Indian scientist

S. Nambi Narayanan is an Indian aerospace engineer who worked for the Indian Space Research Organisation. He was awarded the Padma Bhushan, the third-highest civilian award by the Government of India, in 2019. The scientist was instrumental in developing the Vikas engine that would be used for the first PSLV that India launched.As a senior official at the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO), he was in-charge of the cryogenics division. In 1994, he was falsely charged with espionage and arrested. The charges against him were dismissed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in April 1996, and the Supreme Court of India declared him not guilty in 1998.

Air India Express Flight 812 2010 plane crash in Mangalore, India

On 22 May 2010, a Boeing 737-800 passenger jet operating as Air India Express Flight 812 from Dubai to Mangalore, India, crashed on landing at Mangalore. The captain had continued an unstabilised approach, despite three calls from the first officer to initiate a "go-around", resulting in the aircraft overshooting the runway, falling down a hillside, and bursting into flames. Of the 160 passengers and six crew members on board, 158 were killed ; only eight survived. This was the first fatal accident involving Air India Express.

The Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010

The Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010 or Nuclear Liability Act is a highly debated and controversial Act which was passed by both houses of Indian parliament. The Act aims to provide a civil liability for nuclear damage and prompt compensation to the victims of a nuclear incident through a nofault liability to the operator, appointment of Claims Commissioner, establishment of Nuclear Damage Claims Commission and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

The Hashimpura massacre was an incident of mass murder of 50 muslim men by armed police on or around 22 May 1987 near Meerut in Uttar Pradesh state, India, during the 1987 Meerut communal riots. It is alleged that 19 personnel of the Provincial Armed Constabulary rounded up 42 Muslim youths from the Hashimpura mohalla (locality) of the city, took them to the outskirts of the city, shot them in cold blood and dumped their bodies in a nearby irrigation canal. A few days later, the dead bodies were found floating in the canal and a case of murder was registered. Eventually, 19 men were accused of having performed the act. In May 2000, 16 of the 19 accused surrendered and were later released on bail. Whereas, the other three accused died in the intervening period. In 2002, the Supreme Court of India ordered that the case trial should be transferred from the Ghaziabad district court to a Sessions Court at the Tis Hazari court complex in Delhi.

Amod K. Kanth is a social activist, and former policeman who is best known as the founder of the NGO Prayas, being a children rights advocate and chairperson of the Delhi Commission for Protection of Child Rights (DCPCR). He is also linked with the Uphaar Cinema fire and the 1984 Sikh Riots.

Disappearance of Najeeb Ahmed Indian student

Najeeb Ahmed was a first-year M.Sc. biotech student at the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) in New Delhi, India, who went missing from his hostel on the university campus under suspicious circumstances on 15 October 2016.

2017 Bihar flood Flood in Bihar, India

2017 Bihar floods affected 19 districts of North Bihar causing death of 514 people. 2,371 panchayats under 187 blocks of 19 districts of Northern Bihar have been affected in the flood. Around 1.71 crore people were hit by the floods. Over 8.5 lakhs of people have lost their homes, with Araria district alone accounting for 2.2 lakh homeless people. 2017 Flood has broken 9-Year record of deaths In Bihar. Bihar is India's most flood-prone State, with 76% of the population in the North Bihar living under the recurring threat of flood devastation. Devastating flood was caused due to excess heavy rainfall in monsoon season.

Kathua rape case

The Kathua rape case involved the abduction, gang rape, and murder of an 8-year-old girl, Asifa Bano, in January 2018 in the Rasana village near Kathua in Jammu and Kashmir, India. A chargesheet for the case was filed, the accused were arrested and the trial began in Kathua on 16 April 2018. The victim belonged to the nomadic Bakarwal community. She disappeared for a week before her body was discovered by the villagers a kilometer away from the village. The incident made national news when charges were filed against eight men in April 2018. The arrests of the accused led to protests by the Panthers Party and other local groups, who sought justice for the victim. A protest in support of the accused men was attended by two ministers from the Bharatiya Janata Party, both of whom later resigned. The gang rape and murder, as well as the support the accused received, sparked widespread outrage in India and world-wide.

2017 Unnao rape case Gang rape involving a politician in Unnao

The Unnao rape case refers to the gang rape of a 17-year-old girl on 4 June 2017 in Unnao, Uttar Pradesh, India. On 16 December 2019, former BJP member Kuldeep Singh Sengar was convicted for the rape on 20 December 2019 and sentenced to life imprisonment. Further Sengar was found guilty in the death of the girl's father in judicial custody.

The INX Media case refers to an ongoing high-profile money laundering investigation in India. It involves allegation of irregularities in foreign exchange clearances given to INX Media group for receiving overseas investment in 2007. P. Chidambaram was union finance minister at the time. His son Karti Chidambaram has been implicated by the investigating agencies.

2019 Delhi factory fire Conflagration in India

On 8 December 2019, a fire occurred at a factory building in Anaj Mandi area of Delhi, India. At least 43 people died and more than 56 were injured.

Anu Malhotra is a judge of the Delhi High Court. She has decided a number of key cases relating to freedom of expression, education, governance, and criminal law in India, including a widely reported ban on the publication of a book about businessman and yoga teacher Ramdev, a case concerning poll campaigns by sitting Members of Parliament, and several public interest petitions filed against municipal corporations regarding infrastructure and governance in Delhi.

Veena Birbal is a former judge of the Delhi High Court in India, and the former president of the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. She has adjudicated in a number of significant Indian cases concerning criminal offences and corruption, including the Scorpene deal scam, the 2G spectrum case, the Nitish Katara murder case, and the Uphaar Cinema Fire litigation.

Killing of Sagar Dhankhar

On the night of 4 May 2021, Sushil Kumar, along with several other persons, allegedly beat Sagar Dhankhar badly on an street in Delhi. Dhankhar later died from his injuries while receiving treatment in an hospital.


  1. "Remember Uphaar". Remember Uphaar. Retrieved 10 February 2017.
  2. Cinema fire one of the worst in Indian history Rediff.com , 14 June 1997.
  3. Venkatesan, V (22 December 2007). "Tragic errors". Frontline. Retrieved 26 November 2013.
  4. "Remember Uphaar". Remember Uphaar. Retrieved 24 June 2017.
  5. 1 2 3 India: The Giant Awakens, by Manoher V. Sonalker. Published by Atlantic Publishers & Distributors, 2007. ISBN   81-269-0769-X. Page 333
  6. Uphaar Cinema Verdict - A Breakthrough In Compensation Law Legal View, Laws in India
  7. Activism - Implications of Uphaar Cinema judgement 14 May 2003.
  8. SC reduces compensation to kin of victims Times of India , Thursday, 13 October 2011.
  9. http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=41301
  10. "SC restores two-year jail term if Ansals fail to pay Rs.60 cr". Deccan Herald. Retrieved 24 June 2017.
  11. "Uphaar fire tragedy: SC sentences Gopal Ansal to one year jail". The Indian Express. 9 February 2017. Retrieved 9 February 2017.
  12. Rajendra Sharma (9 November 1999). "Lost son, refused pension". The Tribune. Retrieved 30 November 2014.
  13. "An officer and a gentleman". The Indian Express (PTI Report). 15 June 1997. Retrieved 7 September 2012.
  14. Chander Suta Dogra (22 September 2014). "Veterans, war widows battle for benefits" . Retrieved 30 November 2014.
  15. 60 feared killed in Delhi fire Rediff.com , 13 July 1997.
  16. Delhi cinema fire tragedy claims 59 Indian Express , Saturday, 14 June 1997.
  17. Nightmare and suffering of a birthday girl Indian Express , Saturday, 14 June 1997.
  18. "COurt case proceedings and judgement" (PDF). Civil Appeal Nos. 7114–7115 of 2003. Supreme Court of India. Retrieved 26 November 2013.
  19. Chakravarty, Sayantas (14 July 1997). "Burning questions - Inquiry committee report exposes management's callousness behind Uphaar cinema tragedy". India Today. Retrieved 26 November 2013.
  20. "CBI Enquiry and Witness accounts". Delhi Trial Court. Retrieved 26 November 2013.
  21. "Manmade disasters - Uphaar tragedy" (PDF). Law Commission of India. Retrieved 26 November 2013.
  22. Raveendran, R. "Supreme Court of India M.C.D. vs Asscn.,Victims Of Uphaar Tragedy ... on 13 October, 2011". Supreme court of India proceedings. India Kanoon. Retrieved 26 November 2013.
  23. "Latest High court judgement". Uphaar cinema fire proceedings. High Court of India. Retrieved 26 November 2013.
  24. "Photographs showing violations of DCR,Buildings Byelaws & Fire Safety Rules by Uphaar Cinema Management on 13.06.1997". Remembering Uphaar - AVUT. Retrieved 26 November 2013.
  25. "Seating plan changes". Remember Uphaar - AVUT. Retrieved 26 November 2013.
  26. 1 2 Inquiry report indicts Uphaar management, city authorities Rediff.com , 3 July 1997.
  27. Uphaar cinema indicted in fire tragedy Indian Express , Friday, 4 July 1997.
  28. 1 2 CBI probe ordered into Uphaar cinema fire Rediff.com , 23 July 1997.
  29. 1 2 3 Ten years after Uphaar tragedy, Ansals held guilty The Hindu , 21 November 2007.
  30. Uphaar The Times of India , July 2007, 2000.
  31. Smokescreen after the fire Indian Express , 5 September 2004.
  32. 9 years later, judge inspects Uphaar cinema Indian Express , 20 August 2006.
  33. Judge finds several lacunae in Uphaar cinema The Tribune , 3 September 2006.
  34. 1 2 Uphaar cinema tragedy: Victims finally get justice as Delhi HC orders compensation Rediff.com , 24 April 2003.
  35. Uphaar cinema hall owners summoned The Hindu , 16 February 2008.
  36. 1 2 Delhi court finds 12 guilty in Uphaar cinema fire Reuters , Tue, 20 November 2007 1:09pm.
  37. 1 2 Two-year RI for Uphaar cinema owners The Hindu , 24 November 2007.
  38. Not satisfied, we'll go to HC: Uphaar victims' kin Indian Express , 20 November 2007.
  39. Upahar Cinema Fire Accident Case- Judgement. Delhi, India: Delhi Trial Court.
  40. Uphaar cinema manager lodged in Tihar dies Hindustan Times , 7 December 2008.
  41. Apex court grants bail to Ansals The Hindu , 31 January 2009
  42. Rajagopal, Krishnadas. "Uphaar case: SC dismisses Gopal Ansal's plea". The Hindu. Retrieved 9 March 2017.
  43. ANI (26 March 2014). "Victim of Uphaar tragedy outraged at Sushil Ansal leaving the country" . Retrieved 24 June 2017 via Business Standard.
  44. "Supreme Court gives reasons for letting go Ansal brothers with fine of ₹60 crores #Uphaar". 1, Law Street. 23 September 2015. Retrieved 25 September 2015.
  45. "Ansals Fined 60 Crores But No Jail for Death-Trap Uphaar Cinema" . Retrieved 24 June 2017.
  46. "Uphaar tragedy Judgement conveys culprits can evade law with mere payment of fine: Neelam Katara". news.webmarked.net. ANI. 24 September 2015. Retrieved 24 September 2015.
  47. Friday's fire raises fears that many Delhi movie halls ignore safety norms Rediff.com , 14 June 1997.
  48. Uphaar verdict: Very uplifting Business Line , 8 May 2003.