December 9, 2025 • 26 mins
First, The Indian Express' Pavneet Singh Chaddha talks about the nightclub fire in Goa that killed 25 people and what the incident reveals about India’s recurring failures on basic fire safety and regulation in booming tourist hubs.
Next, we speak to The Indian Express' Vikas Pathak about why a parliamentary motion to commemorate Vande Mataram has escalated into a fierce battle over history and the legacy of the national movement. (11:45)
Lastly, we look at how Rahul Gandhi is sharpening his critique of India’s electoral reforms and the EC’s SIR exercise. (23:40)
Hosted by Ichha Sharma
Produced and written by Shashank Bhargava and Ichha Sharma
Edited and mixed by Suresh Pawar
Next, we speak to The Indian Express' Vikas Pathak about why a parliamentary motion to commemorate Vande Mataram has escalated into a fierce battle over history and the legacy of the national movement. (11:45)
Lastly, we look at how Rahul Gandhi is sharpening his critique of India’s electoral reforms and the EC’s SIR exercise. (23:40)
Hosted by Ichha Sharma
Produced and written by Shashank Bhargava and Ichha Sharma
Edited and mixed by Suresh Pawar
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
In this episode, we look at hia parliamentary motion to
commemorate one day Matram has escalated into a fierce battle
over history and the legacy of the national movement. We
also discuss how Rahul Gandhi is sharpening his critique of
India's electoral reforms and the ACS Sir exercise. But first
(00:21):
we talk about the nightclub fire in Goa that killed
twenty five people and what the incident reveals about India's
recurring failures on basic fire safety and regulation in booming tourist.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
Hubs, Hi am Atchasharma and You're listening to Three Things
the Indian Express New show.
Speaker 1 (00:47):
It was on Saturday night that a deadly fire broke
out inside a nightclub in Goa, claiming a total of
twenty five lives, most of them migrant workers employed at
the establishment. In the aftermath, it surprised almost no one
to learn that the club, like many others across the country,
had failed to meet basic fire safety norms, But in
(01:09):
this case, it turns out it also allegedly lacked the
required permissions and licenses to operate, while violating coastal zone
regulations as well. In this segment, my colleague Shashang Phagav
speaks to the Indian expresses pavnt Singhchada, who has been
reporting on the fire for the paper Pavnit.
Speaker 3 (01:28):
For those who might not know, tell us where exactly
was this nightclub located.
Speaker 4 (01:33):
So, this nightclub by the name of Perch by Romeo
Lane is located in San Quadri, which is in Arpura.
It comes under Baga in North Goa's coastal beach belt
and that place and the areas in the vicinity are
popular for a lot of nightclubs and party places which
go on till late night and are naturally popular among tourists.
(01:55):
Considering that we are in December in the middle of
peak tourist season.
Speaker 3 (02:00):
How these twenty five people ended up losing their lives there?
What do we now know about how the fire started?
Speaker 4 (02:07):
So at eleven forty five on six December night is
the time the information was received regarding a fire outbreak
on the premises. The call came to the MAPSA fire
control room and immediately the fire department teams and police
teams were dispatched for the rescue. From what we know
from the investigation so far is that the fire occurred
(02:30):
because of electrical fireworks that were being carried out during
a dance performance at the nightclub. There were more than
two hundred people tourist patrons at the venue when the
fire occurred. The fire quickly spread to the rooftop area
(03:12):
on the deck floor of the premises where the dance
performance was going on, and since it had a lot
of flammable material on top, it quickly got on and
engulfed the entire premises spread The eyewitnesses told us there
was chaos, panic and commotion. Everybody sort of ran towards
the exit to escape. Now, the layout of the premises
(03:32):
is such that a lot of smoke went towards the
basement area, which had the kitchen where a lot of
the staff of this nightclub had been working. And from
what we know from the investigations so far, maximum casualties
occurred among the workers who were working in the kitchen.
So out of twenty five people who died, twenty were
(03:54):
the staff of the nightclub, including cook's chefs, people who
were doing cutting and cleaning in the kitchen, and they
were all migrant workers from Nepal Assam Jharkhan Utra Khan
Vup Apart from the staff, there were five tourists. Four
(04:17):
were from Delhi and all four were from the same
family and there was one tourist from Tarnataka. Now, as
I explained, the layout of the places such that the
basement of the premises does not have any exit. So
essentially all these migrant workers were trapped in the basement
and they suffocated to death, while two bodies were found
on the upper deck floor among the tourists who were
(04:39):
trying to escape. So according to the officials, it was
a tragedy waiting to happen because a lot of these
migrant workers were trapped due to the smoke engulfing the
basement area.
Speaker 3 (04:51):
Right, And you know, during a fire, one imagines that
the biggest threat would be being burnt alive and getting
third degree burns, but actually there is an almost an
equal risk of suffocating to death.
Speaker 5 (05:03):
Correct.
Speaker 4 (05:03):
In fact, the technical Fire Safety Incident report says that
the fatalities are consistent with exposure to toxic smoke and
oxygen deficient conditions, which usually happens in when there are
fires in enclosed spaces, particularly in basements. So, as per
this report, it says that the basement had inadequate ventilation
and it obstructed means of aggress which sort of contributed
(05:27):
to these people being trapped. In fact, just to quote
from the report, it says the basements represent high risks
zones due to limited natural ventilation, delayed smoke stratification, restricted
less routs, and rapid accumulation of toxic combustion gases like
carbon monoxide, hydrogen cyanide. And these casualty figures indicate that
(05:47):
there were conditions in the basement which sort of contributed.
Speaker 5 (05:51):
To this due to which these casualties occurred.
Speaker 4 (05:54):
When it comes to the cause, you know, prima facy
observations indicate that a fireirework activity was being undertaken which
caused the damage to the frontage of the premises. There's
also a reference to you know, possible short circuit in
the electrical system above the main stage which may have
led But we are right now talking about preliminary investigations,
(06:15):
so we'll know more once the magistrate inquiries complete about
the causes and the circumstances leading to the fire.
Speaker 3 (06:22):
By the way, I don't know if it came as
a surprise to you, but what really seemed a bit
shocking was that fireworks were taking place inside this small nightclub.
Speaker 5 (06:32):
Right, you're correct.
Speaker 4 (06:33):
But you know, in a lot of shacks and nightclubs,
these firework performances are part of you know, attraction for
the tourists. But at the same time, the question arises
about the enforcement and fire safety audits that are conducted
by the state authorities. There's definitely negligence on part of
the authorities on that front to ensure that if fireworks
(06:53):
are being used, are they necessary protocols and SUPs designed
to prevent these fatalities. Now, as for the fires department,
this establishment had not obtained any valid ncy from the
fire department. So that is where the question arises of
negligence and not per se you know, like the like
the performances.
Speaker 5 (07:12):
Because that is part of the entertainment.
Speaker 3 (07:14):
Yeah. And apart from this club not adhering to the
required fire safety norms, there are also questions about the
property itself. So tell us a bit about those allegations.
Speaker 4 (07:24):
Yes, so this structure where this property is located, this
establishment has been operating without obtaining a lot of licenses.
For instance, it did not have any construction license. Now
police have registered at fire and during the investigation, the
serpunch of Arpura Naga village.
Speaker 5 (07:44):
He alleged that this.
Speaker 4 (07:45):
Nightclub had been operating without any construction license and because
there was a dispute between the landowner and the partners
who were running this premises, the Panchayath had issued a
demolition notice for this property. However, after the owner of
the property an appeal against the demolition order with the
Punchayat office, the Deputy Dietor of Punchayat put us stay.
Speaker 5 (08:05):
On this premises. So that is one Apart from this.
Speaker 4 (08:09):
There have been other lapses as well regarding the coastal
regulation zone violations. It has been alleged and the Coastal
State Management Authority had received at least two complaints alleging
that this water body where this exagonal shape premises had
been operating had been built in a water body where
there was a salt pan, so there was a violation
(08:30):
of coastal regulation zones. But the Goa State Coastal Zone
Management Authority had dropped those proceedings citing that a jurisdictional issue.
The Authority in its order in October observed that as
for the Coastal Zone Management Plan, this area falls beyond
the CERG areas and it is beyond their jurisdiction.
Speaker 5 (08:51):
So there were lapses.
Speaker 4 (08:53):
On multiple fronts when it comes to fire safety, coastal regulation, zones,
construction license. The Punchayat also so had given this establishment
a trade license which expired in twenty twenty four.
Speaker 5 (09:04):
So all this is now.
Speaker 4 (09:05):
Being part of the inquiry which is being conducted by
a four member committee about on these lapses and the
circumstances which led to the fire which could have been prevented.
Speaker 3 (09:15):
And probably now talk about the action that the police
has taken against the club owners and the partners involved.
Speaker 4 (09:21):
So the police file an fire against the owners of
this nightclub, who are two brothers based in Delhi, Sa
Luthra and Goro Luthra. The ffire also mentions that the
charges of culpable homicide have been invoked against owners, managers,
partners and the event organizers. When it comes to arrests,
police have arrested five people so far, including the management
(09:44):
staff and people who were running daily operations. But regarding
these owners, the police dispatched a team to Delhi and
later they found that these two brothers saw Lutra and
Goa Luthra.
Speaker 5 (09:57):
They have escaped to Thailand.
Speaker 4 (10:00):
Police has approached CBI to issue a blue corner notice
against the Luthra brothers in a bit to you know,
ensure that they are brought to go and arrested. According
to police, the Luthra brothers were in Delhi at the
time the fire took place, and within hours of the
tragedy they took a flight from Delhi and are believed
(10:22):
to have flown to Thailand.
Speaker 3 (10:24):
And you know, this incident is also happening at a
time when the state has been very concerned about Goa's
image as a tourist destination. So is this state worried that,
you know, this incident would impact people coming to the state,
especially international travelers, because this incident has made a lot
of news.
Speaker 4 (10:44):
Right So it is definitely a concern because it comes
in the middle of the tourist season and among the
people who died in the fire, there were five tourists.
So definitely the safety of tourists is a concern and
it will play on the mind of a lot of
people who were or are traveling to go.
Speaker 5 (11:03):
Up during this season.
Speaker 4 (11:05):
As you mentioned, over the last one year, tourism in
Goa has been in the headlines for a lot of challenges.
In adequate infrastructure, the taxi issue and the declining number
of foreign tourists.
Speaker 5 (11:17):
The state has been.
Speaker 4 (11:18):
You know, trying to attract a lot of foreign tourists,
trying to lobby the center to have schemes like visa
on arrival evisas to ensure the tourists come here. So
definitely nobody wants to come to go to die. And
when such incidents happen, it is a concern that is
likely to play on the minds of tourists coming. And
we'll see in the coming days how the state manages
(11:40):
to tackle decision.
Speaker 1 (11:45):
And next we talk about how are discussion scheduled to
mark one hundred and fifty years of one day Mathram
turned into a sharp confrontation over the ownership of one
of India's most recognizable nationalist symbols in Parliament this week.
The government had moved a motion to commemorate the song,
first penned by Bunkim Chandra Chattopadhya in eighteen seventy five,
(12:09):
but Prime Minister and Arranged Remodi during his speech in
the Luksabh accused the Congress of appeasement politics claimed that
jahan Nal Nhru had truncated the song under pressure from
Mhmadali Jinna and the Muslim League, and argued that this
surrender set the stage for the eventual partition of India. Now,
to understand why conversations around One Day Matram have become
(12:31):
so politically charged, it is important to look at how
the song came to be and how its use has changed.
Speaker 6 (12:38):
Over the time. Yeah, So basically it happened that in
eighteen seventy five Matram was first composed independently and separately.
Speaker 1 (12:48):
This is The Indian Express's Vika Spartak who reported on
the story for the paper.
Speaker 6 (12:53):
And it was basically a description of what Bunkim saw
as quote unquote the motherland, which would be seen as
the country now. In eighteen eighty two he wrote Ananda
Mutt and in Ananda Mut this one Day Mathrum was added. Now,
apart from the first two stanzas, which are you know,
descriptions of the beauty of the country, there were other
(13:14):
stanzas as well that came up. And those stanzas were
a bit more of having some religious undertones because they
described the motherland as variously as you know, Durga, Saraswati Lakshmi.
So that was the full one Day Madrm that came
up in Ananda mut. So what happens is that around
(13:35):
nineteen hundred and five One Day Mathram became extremely popular
when Bengal was partitioned. Even before that, it was set
to tune by Rabina Tegor and was first sung in
a Congress session I think around eighteen ninety six. But
later what happens is that it became an extremely influential song.
In nineteen hundred and five, when Bengal was partitioned by
(13:57):
Lord Curzon and the anti part of Bengal movement, it
actually took up One Day Mathraam as a very important
song for itself and a lot of protests were organized
with the singing of Wande Mathram.
Speaker 1 (14:11):
And so One Day Mathram became a key slogan of
the anti partition agitation. And because it was bilingual partly
Sanskrit partly Bangala, it traveled from Bengal to the rest
of India and became closely associated with the national movement
and with the Indian National Congress.
Speaker 6 (14:29):
Because in the coming years, gradually Indian National Congress became
the main vehicle of the Indian feedom struggle and One
Day Matharam became one of the fixtures, so at multiple
congress sasons, one Day Matraam was sung.
Speaker 1 (14:42):
But the controversy around it surfaced a bit later, from
the nineteen thirties. Certain sections of the Muslim League and
certain sections of the Muslim public objected to the song
on two main grounds.
Speaker 6 (14:55):
One is that it had idolatory in it. If you
look at the full one Day Martha as it came
up in eighteen eighty two, so descriptions of Hindu goddesses,
So the motherland or the nation get somewhat associated with
the Hindu goddesses and of course with idols. So that
was one objection that was raised to Aan de ma Atram.
The second objection, and perhaps which also became a reason
(15:17):
for controversy, was that it was added to Anantha Mut,
and the plot of Anantham Mut, which was located in
the context of the late nineteenth century Faminine Bengal, was
the story of a rebellion of Sanya Sis against both
the company and of course the Nawab of Bengal, who
bunkeimar Bus was hand in love with the company, So
(15:37):
it had allusions to medieval times. Also, it had illusions
where you know, it could be to an extent scene
as not just a revolt against the company, but in
fact revolt against the Nawab of Bengal and thereby could
have some allusions to Muslim rule. And at that time,
let's remember that nineteen thirties, the Indian National Congress was
trying very hard to get Muslims on Boo in the
(16:00):
freedom struggle and to ensure that Muslims did not join
the Muslim League. Because gradually, let's not forget that by
the late thirties sections of the Muslim League that had
an overlap with the Congress, that trend was disappearing, and
we see the movement of people like Jinna gradually from
the late thirties towards a more separatist line, which became
all the more pronounced around nineteen forty. So in that context,
(16:23):
it was very necessary for the Nationalist leadership to address
this question that are there any concerns, genuine concerns about
the song or is it just propaganda of the Muslim League.
Speaker 1 (16:33):
And so it was in nineteen thirty seven that the
Congress Working Committee discussed the issue in detail and arrived
at a compromise. It concluded that the first two stanzas
of one day Matram had inspired millions who participated in
the freedom struggle and should continue to be sung and respected.
Speaker 6 (16:51):
And they said the remaining Stanzas, which are being seen
as some kind of having religious illusions, they can be
avoided for national perosi, which means we can have a
one day Matharam with the first two Stanzas as a song.
That Indian National Congress still reversed. This was a position
of Nehru. This was the position of Ghandhi because the
CWC when it met, there was Nehru, there was Ghandhi,
(17:14):
there was In fact Ramina Tego was also invited there.
So this was a kind of consensus that emerged, after
which one Day Batram became about the first two Stanzas,
and later when the question came as to what should
be the national anthem of India around independence, it was
decided that Jena gun Man will become the national anthem,
(17:37):
and Nehru wrote a note to the cabinet saying that
it was more amenable to orchestral rendering because the national
anthem has to be sung across the world and Jena
guan one was easier put to tune than one Day
Makram One Day Matraam had also been put to tune,
but it was felt that young Gunman is more suited
and it was said that the first two stanzas of
(17:59):
the one they Matraam will remain at the national song
and will continue to get the respect that it had
during the freedom struggle. Well after that, gradually, as you
see over the decades, the one Dam became more associated
with the VJP. The RS is the ab VP and
almost every RSS function or even VJP function or with
the archiparation function also has you know, recital of One
(18:23):
Day Matram. So gradually it became more associated with the
Hindu than with the Indian National Congress. Though the Congress
continue to say that we respect the first two stanzas.
Speaker 1 (18:33):
And so it is this historical compromise that the Prime
Minister directly targeted in his recent.
Speaker 5 (18:39):
Speech mann.
Speaker 7 (18:47):
Mane Manday Martram geka background para.
Speaker 5 (18:58):
Edge of background head you say Muslim working.
Speaker 6 (19:04):
So the Prime Minister spoke about it it yesterday and
the Minister Rajna Singh also said that the whole idea
that Juan Day Mathram is somehow anti Muslim is a
spurious idea which has been spread today of course, Home
Minister Amisha has taken it a bit forward and he
has said very explicitly that the background of the one
day Mathram is important and the background of the Wan
(19:25):
day Mathram is that it is some kind of a
symbol of India's civilizational soul which was battered by centuries
of a Muslim invasion as also the later British occupation
of India, wherein the British tried to civilizationally alter the country.
So when the British tried to do that, in fact,
the Prime Minster had also said yesterday that the British
(19:47):
were trying to spread God Save the King their national
anthem throughout Indian homes. And it was then that Bunkington
Chattopad had took up the challenge and came up with
one day Mathram which was a kind of a civilizational
message or a ch challenge to what the British are doing?
Speaker 7 (20:02):
Are they one day mathramaki Jarua, one day Matram, one
day Matra, banatabijadik and Waktibithi archbis.
Speaker 5 (20:23):
Mahanara.
Speaker 6 (20:27):
So today mister Amisha has taken it a bit more
on the Hindu line, but it is very clear that
the VJP wants to say that one Day Matram somehow
looking at the country as the mother, even allusions to
Hindu goddesses. These are about the soul of Indian civilization,
which foundationally remains Hindu to a certain extent. So it
(20:49):
is very aggressively trying to say that.
Speaker 1 (20:52):
Meanwhile, the Congress and other opposition parties are responding to
these arguments from a slightly constrained position.
Speaker 6 (21:00):
Look, the opposition is having to be very careful because
if they tell the government you are pro one Day
Mathram precisely because of the religious allusions, then the government
will say that you are anti Juan de Matraam and
you're looking for excuses. So the situation is this that
the Congress cannot disown one Day Matraam because that will
be disowning a very old legacy. At the same time,
(21:21):
the Congress will not want to be seen, as you know,
being on the front foot to celebrate One Day Athram
as their prime song. So it has been a calibrated
position for the Congress over the last several decades. So
ban part said that we always respected one Day Mathram
the first two stanzas, and she said that it was
on many occasions. In fact, it was set to toul
(21:43):
for the first time in a session of the Indian
National Congress by Ravina Tabor. And she also said that
when you blame Javarla Lehu for you know, the nineteen
thirty seven official truncation of the one day Matram, you're
forgetting that people like Mahama Gandhi, Subhashan Rabos with that
tech vote, they were all on board on that. So
that is something that you are trying to conceal. That
(22:04):
is the position of the Congress. And they also said
that at the time of the Constituent Assembly it was
accepted as a national song while it was not accepted
as the national anthem. So this is the position of
the Congress. Very interestingly, I'd also add one thing. When
Deepender saying Huda was speaking yesterday in the evening, it
was very interesting that when he talked about one day Mathram,
(22:24):
he actually talked also about his family legacy, where he
said that his great grandfather was sentenced to Sasai Kalapani
sent to the Sedular jail of Ndermann in nineteen hundred
and seven for six years. And he also said that
his grandfather, who was also a member of the Constituent
Assembly and had gone to jail, he said, for eight
years fighting the British. He said that his grandfather wrote
(22:47):
a book which was titled Juan de Matra. So Congress
people were also trying to somehow suggest that, see, you
cannot distance the Congress from the freedom struggle, because it
was a prime weahkle of the freedom struggle. Even gor
Gogoi said in his speech that one day Mathraam represents
the spirit of the freedom struggle, of struggling against British rule,
and he said that where were your ideological incestors when
(23:10):
the struggle was going on. So it is a kind
of a you know, it's a slugfest where the VJP
is trying to say that or the government is trying
to say that the Congress compromised on one day Mathraam
because of its politics of appeasement of the Muslim League,
which also led to partition, and the Congress deacidly saying
that we respect the song and let's not forget that
it was our people and our sessions where the first
(23:32):
two stanzas were sung. So that is the kind of
a political debate that has been there for two days
on the one day Mathram.
Speaker 1 (23:43):
And in the end, we take a look at how
Rahul Gandhi framed his critique on the SIR in Parliament
during the debate on electoral reforms, Leader of the Opposition
Rahul Gandhi yesterday sharply criticized the Election Commission and the
government's handling of the Special Intensive Revision of Electoral Roads.
Gandhi framed his remarks around allegations of institutional bias, lack
(24:07):
of transparency and what he described as a reduced public
trust in electoral processes.
Speaker 8 (24:14):
The biggest anti national act you can do is vot
should there is no bigger there's no bigger anti national
act that you can do. Then vote sure, because when
you when you destroy the vote, you destroy the fabric
of this country. You destroy modern India, you destroyed the
(24:36):
idea of India.
Speaker 1 (24:38):
As reported by the Indian Expresses minote cg and kas Parthak,
the opposition parties used the debate to demand a return
to paper ballots and question the impartiality of the EC.
While most opposition parties supported reverting to paper ballots, the
Trinumul Congress and Sharapawa's NCP did not take a position
on EVMS. Congress MP moneyvari argued for one hundred percent
(25:02):
VVPAT verification or a switch to paper ballots, while Gandhi
limited his demand to seeking opposition access to the EVM architecture.
Gandhi reiterated his earlier allegations of vote theft and claimed
the RSS and BJP were attempting to capture India's institutional framework,
including the EC. He argued that the EC was colluding
(25:23):
with those in power to shape the elections. During the debate,
he raised three main questions. First, why the Chief Justice
of India was removed from the selection panel appointing election commissioners. Second,
why are twenty twenty three law grants immunity to serving
or former election commissioners for actions taken in office? And lastly,
(25:45):
why the EC changed rules to allow destruction of CCTV
footage forty five days after election results. He also claimed
that election campaigns were being aligned with the Prime Minister's
requirements and repeated his assertion that the Yana election was stolen,
alleging that the EC ensured the outcome. Meanwhile, speakers from
(26:05):
the sp DMK Udhavas Shivshena echoed criticism of EVMS and
supported a returned to paper ballot, while others questioned the
legality of the SII exercise. You were listening to Three
Things by the Indian Express. Today's show was edited and
mixed by Seshavar and produced by Shishanghgov and me Ichasharma.
(26:28):
If you like the show, do subscribe to us wherever
you get your podcast. You can also recommend it to
someone you think may like it, with a friend or
in your family. This is the best way for people
to get to know about us. You can also tweet
us at Express podcast or write to us at podcast
at Indian Express dot com.
In this episode, we look at hia parliamentary motion to
commemorate one day Matram has escalated into a fierce battle
over history and the legacy of the national movement. We
also discuss how Rahul Gandhi is sharpening his critique of
India's electoral reforms and the ACS Sir exercise. But first
(00:21):
we talk about the nightclub fire in Goa that killed
twenty five people and what the incident reveals about India's
recurring failures on basic fire safety and regulation in booming tourist.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
Hubs, Hi am Atchasharma and You're listening to Three Things
the Indian Express New show.
Speaker 1 (00:47):
It was on Saturday night that a deadly fire broke
out inside a nightclub in Goa, claiming a total of
twenty five lives, most of them migrant workers employed at
the establishment. In the aftermath, it surprised almost no one
to learn that the club, like many others across the country,
had failed to meet basic fire safety norms, But in
(01:09):
this case, it turns out it also allegedly lacked the
required permissions and licenses to operate, while violating coastal zone
regulations as well. In this segment, my colleague Shashang Phagav
speaks to the Indian expresses pavnt Singhchada, who has been
reporting on the fire for the paper Pavnit.
Speaker 3 (01:28):
For those who might not know, tell us where exactly
was this nightclub located.
Speaker 4 (01:33):
So, this nightclub by the name of Perch by Romeo
Lane is located in San Quadri, which is in Arpura.
It comes under Baga in North Goa's coastal beach belt
and that place and the areas in the vicinity are
popular for a lot of nightclubs and party places which
go on till late night and are naturally popular among tourists.
(01:55):
Considering that we are in December in the middle of
peak tourist season.
Speaker 3 (02:00):
How these twenty five people ended up losing their lives there?
What do we now know about how the fire started?
Speaker 4 (02:07):
So at eleven forty five on six December night is
the time the information was received regarding a fire outbreak
on the premises. The call came to the MAPSA fire
control room and immediately the fire department teams and police
teams were dispatched for the rescue. From what we know
from the investigation so far is that the fire occurred
(02:30):
because of electrical fireworks that were being carried out during
a dance performance at the nightclub. There were more than
two hundred people tourist patrons at the venue when the
fire occurred. The fire quickly spread to the rooftop area
(03:12):
on the deck floor of the premises where the dance
performance was going on, and since it had a lot
of flammable material on top, it quickly got on and
engulfed the entire premises spread The eyewitnesses told us there
was chaos, panic and commotion. Everybody sort of ran towards
the exit to escape. Now, the layout of the premises
(03:32):
is such that a lot of smoke went towards the
basement area, which had the kitchen where a lot of
the staff of this nightclub had been working. And from
what we know from the investigations so far, maximum casualties
occurred among the workers who were working in the kitchen.
So out of twenty five people who died, twenty were
(03:54):
the staff of the nightclub, including cook's chefs, people who
were doing cutting and cleaning in the kitchen, and they
were all migrant workers from Nepal Assam Jharkhan Utra Khan
Vup Apart from the staff, there were five tourists. Four
(04:17):
were from Delhi and all four were from the same
family and there was one tourist from Tarnataka. Now, as
I explained, the layout of the places such that the
basement of the premises does not have any exit. So
essentially all these migrant workers were trapped in the basement
and they suffocated to death, while two bodies were found
on the upper deck floor among the tourists who were
(04:39):
trying to escape. So according to the officials, it was
a tragedy waiting to happen because a lot of these
migrant workers were trapped due to the smoke engulfing the
basement area.
Speaker 3 (04:51):
Right, And you know, during a fire, one imagines that
the biggest threat would be being burnt alive and getting
third degree burns, but actually there is an almost an
equal risk of suffocating to death.
Speaker 5 (05:03):
Correct.
Speaker 4 (05:03):
In fact, the technical Fire Safety Incident report says that
the fatalities are consistent with exposure to toxic smoke and
oxygen deficient conditions, which usually happens in when there are
fires in enclosed spaces, particularly in basements. So, as per
this report, it says that the basement had inadequate ventilation
and it obstructed means of aggress which sort of contributed
(05:27):
to these people being trapped. In fact, just to quote
from the report, it says the basements represent high risks
zones due to limited natural ventilation, delayed smoke stratification, restricted
less routs, and rapid accumulation of toxic combustion gases like
carbon monoxide, hydrogen cyanide. And these casualty figures indicate that
(05:47):
there were conditions in the basement which sort of contributed.
Speaker 5 (05:51):
To this due to which these casualties occurred.
Speaker 4 (05:54):
When it comes to the cause, you know, prima facy
observations indicate that a fireirework activity was being undertaken which
caused the damage to the frontage of the premises. There's
also a reference to you know, possible short circuit in
the electrical system above the main stage which may have
led But we are right now talking about preliminary investigations,
(06:15):
so we'll know more once the magistrate inquiries complete about
the causes and the circumstances leading to the fire.
Speaker 3 (06:22):
By the way, I don't know if it came as
a surprise to you, but what really seemed a bit
shocking was that fireworks were taking place inside this small nightclub.
Speaker 5 (06:32):
Right, you're correct.
Speaker 4 (06:33):
But you know, in a lot of shacks and nightclubs,
these firework performances are part of you know, attraction for
the tourists. But at the same time, the question arises
about the enforcement and fire safety audits that are conducted
by the state authorities. There's definitely negligence on part of
the authorities on that front to ensure that if fireworks
(06:53):
are being used, are they necessary protocols and SUPs designed
to prevent these fatalities. Now, as for the fires department,
this establishment had not obtained any valid ncy from the
fire department. So that is where the question arises of
negligence and not per se you know, like the like
the performances.
Speaker 5 (07:12):
Because that is part of the entertainment.
Speaker 3 (07:14):
Yeah. And apart from this club not adhering to the
required fire safety norms, there are also questions about the
property itself. So tell us a bit about those allegations.
Speaker 4 (07:24):
Yes, so this structure where this property is located, this
establishment has been operating without obtaining a lot of licenses.
For instance, it did not have any construction license. Now
police have registered at fire and during the investigation, the
serpunch of Arpura Naga village.
Speaker 5 (07:44):
He alleged that this.
Speaker 4 (07:45):
Nightclub had been operating without any construction license and because
there was a dispute between the landowner and the partners
who were running this premises, the Panchayath had issued a
demolition notice for this property. However, after the owner of
the property an appeal against the demolition order with the
Punchayat office, the Deputy Dietor of Punchayat put us stay.
Speaker 5 (08:05):
On this premises. So that is one Apart from this.
Speaker 4 (08:09):
There have been other lapses as well regarding the coastal
regulation zone violations. It has been alleged and the Coastal
State Management Authority had received at least two complaints alleging
that this water body where this exagonal shape premises had
been operating had been built in a water body where
there was a salt pan, so there was a violation
(08:30):
of coastal regulation zones. But the Goa State Coastal Zone
Management Authority had dropped those proceedings citing that a jurisdictional issue.
The Authority in its order in October observed that as
for the Coastal Zone Management Plan, this area falls beyond
the CERG areas and it is beyond their jurisdiction.
Speaker 5 (08:51):
So there were lapses.
Speaker 4 (08:53):
On multiple fronts when it comes to fire safety, coastal regulation, zones,
construction license. The Punchayat also so had given this establishment
a trade license which expired in twenty twenty four.
Speaker 5 (09:04):
So all this is now.
Speaker 4 (09:05):
Being part of the inquiry which is being conducted by
a four member committee about on these lapses and the
circumstances which led to the fire which could have been prevented.
Speaker 3 (09:15):
And probably now talk about the action that the police
has taken against the club owners and the partners involved.
Speaker 4 (09:21):
So the police file an fire against the owners of
this nightclub, who are two brothers based in Delhi, Sa
Luthra and Goro Luthra. The ffire also mentions that the
charges of culpable homicide have been invoked against owners, managers,
partners and the event organizers. When it comes to arrests,
police have arrested five people so far, including the management
(09:44):
staff and people who were running daily operations. But regarding
these owners, the police dispatched a team to Delhi and
later they found that these two brothers saw Lutra and
Goa Luthra.
Speaker 5 (09:57):
They have escaped to Thailand.
Speaker 4 (10:00):
Police has approached CBI to issue a blue corner notice
against the Luthra brothers in a bit to you know,
ensure that they are brought to go and arrested. According
to police, the Luthra brothers were in Delhi at the
time the fire took place, and within hours of the
tragedy they took a flight from Delhi and are believed
(10:22):
to have flown to Thailand.
Speaker 3 (10:24):
And you know, this incident is also happening at a
time when the state has been very concerned about Goa's
image as a tourist destination. So is this state worried that,
you know, this incident would impact people coming to the state,
especially international travelers, because this incident has made a lot
of news.
Speaker 4 (10:44):
Right So it is definitely a concern because it comes
in the middle of the tourist season and among the
people who died in the fire, there were five tourists.
So definitely the safety of tourists is a concern and
it will play on the mind of a lot of
people who were or are traveling to go.
Speaker 5 (11:03):
Up during this season.
Speaker 4 (11:05):
As you mentioned, over the last one year, tourism in
Goa has been in the headlines for a lot of challenges.
In adequate infrastructure, the taxi issue and the declining number
of foreign tourists.
Speaker 5 (11:17):
The state has been.
Speaker 4 (11:18):
You know, trying to attract a lot of foreign tourists,
trying to lobby the center to have schemes like visa
on arrival evisas to ensure the tourists come here. So
definitely nobody wants to come to go to die. And
when such incidents happen, it is a concern that is
likely to play on the minds of tourists coming. And
we'll see in the coming days how the state manages
(11:40):
to tackle decision.
Speaker 1 (11:45):
And next we talk about how are discussion scheduled to
mark one hundred and fifty years of one day Mathram
turned into a sharp confrontation over the ownership of one
of India's most recognizable nationalist symbols in Parliament this week.
The government had moved a motion to commemorate the song,
first penned by Bunkim Chandra Chattopadhya in eighteen seventy five,
(12:09):
but Prime Minister and Arranged Remodi during his speech in
the Luksabh accused the Congress of appeasement politics claimed that
jahan Nal Nhru had truncated the song under pressure from
Mhmadali Jinna and the Muslim League, and argued that this
surrender set the stage for the eventual partition of India. Now,
to understand why conversations around One Day Matram have become
(12:31):
so politically charged, it is important to look at how
the song came to be and how its use has changed.
Speaker 6 (12:38):
Over the time. Yeah, So basically it happened that in
eighteen seventy five Matram was first composed independently and separately.
Speaker 1 (12:48):
This is The Indian Express's Vika Spartak who reported on
the story for the paper.
Speaker 6 (12:53):
And it was basically a description of what Bunkim saw
as quote unquote the motherland, which would be seen as
the country now. In eighteen eighty two he wrote Ananda
Mutt and in Ananda Mut this one Day Mathrum was added. Now,
apart from the first two stanzas, which are you know,
descriptions of the beauty of the country, there were other
(13:14):
stanzas as well that came up. And those stanzas were
a bit more of having some religious undertones because they
described the motherland as variously as you know, Durga, Saraswati Lakshmi.
So that was the full one Day Madrm that came
up in Ananda mut. So what happens is that around
(13:35):
nineteen hundred and five One Day Mathram became extremely popular
when Bengal was partitioned. Even before that, it was set
to tune by Rabina Tegor and was first sung in
a Congress session I think around eighteen ninety six. But
later what happens is that it became an extremely influential song.
In nineteen hundred and five, when Bengal was partitioned by
(13:57):
Lord Curzon and the anti part of Bengal movement, it
actually took up One Day Mathraam as a very important
song for itself and a lot of protests were organized
with the singing of Wande Mathram.
Speaker 1 (14:11):
And so One Day Mathram became a key slogan of
the anti partition agitation. And because it was bilingual partly
Sanskrit partly Bangala, it traveled from Bengal to the rest
of India and became closely associated with the national movement
and with the Indian National Congress.
Speaker 6 (14:29):
Because in the coming years, gradually Indian National Congress became
the main vehicle of the Indian feedom struggle and One
Day Matharam became one of the fixtures, so at multiple
congress sasons, one Day Matraam was sung.
Speaker 1 (14:42):
But the controversy around it surfaced a bit later, from
the nineteen thirties. Certain sections of the Muslim League and
certain sections of the Muslim public objected to the song
on two main grounds.
Speaker 6 (14:55):
One is that it had idolatory in it. If you
look at the full one Day Martha as it came
up in eighteen eighty two, so descriptions of Hindu goddesses,
So the motherland or the nation get somewhat associated with
the Hindu goddesses and of course with idols. So that
was one objection that was raised to Aan de ma Atram.
The second objection, and perhaps which also became a reason
(15:17):
for controversy, was that it was added to Anantha Mut,
and the plot of Anantham Mut, which was located in
the context of the late nineteenth century Faminine Bengal, was
the story of a rebellion of Sanya Sis against both
the company and of course the Nawab of Bengal, who
bunkeimar Bus was hand in love with the company, So
(15:37):
it had allusions to medieval times. Also, it had illusions
where you know, it could be to an extent scene
as not just a revolt against the company, but in
fact revolt against the Nawab of Bengal and thereby could
have some allusions to Muslim rule. And at that time,
let's remember that nineteen thirties, the Indian National Congress was
trying very hard to get Muslims on Boo in the
(16:00):
freedom struggle and to ensure that Muslims did not join
the Muslim League. Because gradually, let's not forget that by
the late thirties sections of the Muslim League that had
an overlap with the Congress, that trend was disappearing, and
we see the movement of people like Jinna gradually from
the late thirties towards a more separatist line, which became
all the more pronounced around nineteen forty. So in that context,
(16:23):
it was very necessary for the Nationalist leadership to address
this question that are there any concerns, genuine concerns about
the song or is it just propaganda of the Muslim League.
Speaker 1 (16:33):
And so it was in nineteen thirty seven that the
Congress Working Committee discussed the issue in detail and arrived
at a compromise. It concluded that the first two stanzas
of one day Matram had inspired millions who participated in
the freedom struggle and should continue to be sung and respected.
Speaker 6 (16:51):
And they said the remaining Stanzas, which are being seen
as some kind of having religious illusions, they can be
avoided for national perosi, which means we can have a
one day Matharam with the first two Stanzas as a song.
That Indian National Congress still reversed. This was a position
of Nehru. This was the position of Ghandhi because the
CWC when it met, there was Nehru, there was Ghandhi,
(17:14):
there was In fact Ramina Tego was also invited there.
So this was a kind of consensus that emerged, after
which one Day Batram became about the first two Stanzas,
and later when the question came as to what should
be the national anthem of India around independence, it was
decided that Jena gun Man will become the national anthem,
(17:37):
and Nehru wrote a note to the cabinet saying that
it was more amenable to orchestral rendering because the national
anthem has to be sung across the world and Jena
guan one was easier put to tune than one Day
Makram One Day Matraam had also been put to tune,
but it was felt that young Gunman is more suited
and it was said that the first two stanzas of
(17:59):
the one they Matraam will remain at the national song
and will continue to get the respect that it had
during the freedom struggle. Well after that, gradually, as you
see over the decades, the one Dam became more associated
with the VJP. The RS is the ab VP and
almost every RSS function or even VJP function or with
the archiparation function also has you know, recital of One
(18:23):
Day Matram. So gradually it became more associated with the
Hindu than with the Indian National Congress. Though the Congress
continue to say that we respect the first two stanzas.
Speaker 1 (18:33):
And so it is this historical compromise that the Prime
Minister directly targeted in his recent.
Speaker 5 (18:39):
Speech mann.
Speaker 7 (18:47):
Mane Manday Martram geka background para.
Speaker 5 (18:58):
Edge of background head you say Muslim working.
Speaker 6 (19:04):
So the Prime Minister spoke about it it yesterday and
the Minister Rajna Singh also said that the whole idea
that Juan Day Mathram is somehow anti Muslim is a
spurious idea which has been spread today of course, Home
Minister Amisha has taken it a bit forward and he
has said very explicitly that the background of the one
day Mathram is important and the background of the Wan
(19:25):
day Mathram is that it is some kind of a
symbol of India's civilizational soul which was battered by centuries
of a Muslim invasion as also the later British occupation
of India, wherein the British tried to civilizationally alter the country.
So when the British tried to do that, in fact,
the Prime Minster had also said yesterday that the British
(19:47):
were trying to spread God Save the King their national
anthem throughout Indian homes. And it was then that Bunkington
Chattopad had took up the challenge and came up with
one day Mathram which was a kind of a civilizational
message or a ch challenge to what the British are doing?
Speaker 7 (20:02):
Are they one day mathramaki Jarua, one day Matram, one
day Matra, banatabijadik and Waktibithi archbis.
Speaker 5 (20:23):
Mahanara.
Speaker 6 (20:27):
So today mister Amisha has taken it a bit more
on the Hindu line, but it is very clear that
the VJP wants to say that one Day Matram somehow
looking at the country as the mother, even allusions to
Hindu goddesses. These are about the soul of Indian civilization,
which foundationally remains Hindu to a certain extent. So it
(20:49):
is very aggressively trying to say that.
Speaker 1 (20:52):
Meanwhile, the Congress and other opposition parties are responding to
these arguments from a slightly constrained position.
Speaker 6 (21:00):
Look, the opposition is having to be very careful because
if they tell the government you are pro one Day
Mathram precisely because of the religious allusions, then the government
will say that you are anti Juan de Matraam and
you're looking for excuses. So the situation is this that
the Congress cannot disown one Day Matraam because that will
be disowning a very old legacy. At the same time,
(21:21):
the Congress will not want to be seen, as you know,
being on the front foot to celebrate One Day Athram
as their prime song. So it has been a calibrated
position for the Congress over the last several decades. So
ban part said that we always respected one Day Mathram
the first two stanzas, and she said that it was
on many occasions. In fact, it was set to toul
(21:43):
for the first time in a session of the Indian
National Congress by Ravina Tabor. And she also said that
when you blame Javarla Lehu for you know, the nineteen
thirty seven official truncation of the one day Matram, you're
forgetting that people like Mahama Gandhi, Subhashan Rabos with that
tech vote, they were all on board on that. So
that is something that you are trying to conceal. That
(22:04):
is the position of the Congress. And they also said
that at the time of the Constituent Assembly it was
accepted as a national song while it was not accepted
as the national anthem. So this is the position of
the Congress. Very interestingly, I'd also add one thing. When
Deepender saying Huda was speaking yesterday in the evening, it
was very interesting that when he talked about one day Mathram,
(22:24):
he actually talked also about his family legacy, where he
said that his great grandfather was sentenced to Sasai Kalapani
sent to the Sedular jail of Ndermann in nineteen hundred
and seven for six years. And he also said that
his grandfather, who was also a member of the Constituent
Assembly and had gone to jail, he said, for eight
years fighting the British. He said that his grandfather wrote
(22:47):
a book which was titled Juan de Matra. So Congress
people were also trying to somehow suggest that, see, you
cannot distance the Congress from the freedom struggle, because it
was a prime weahkle of the freedom struggle. Even gor
Gogoi said in his speech that one day Mathraam represents
the spirit of the freedom struggle, of struggling against British rule,
and he said that where were your ideological incestors when
(23:10):
the struggle was going on. So it is a kind
of a you know, it's a slugfest where the VJP
is trying to say that or the government is trying
to say that the Congress compromised on one day Mathraam
because of its politics of appeasement of the Muslim League,
which also led to partition, and the Congress deacidly saying
that we respect the song and let's not forget that
it was our people and our sessions where the first
(23:32):
two stanzas were sung. So that is the kind of
a political debate that has been there for two days
on the one day Mathram.
Speaker 1 (23:43):
And in the end, we take a look at how
Rahul Gandhi framed his critique on the SIR in Parliament
during the debate on electoral reforms, Leader of the Opposition
Rahul Gandhi yesterday sharply criticized the Election Commission and the
government's handling of the Special Intensive Revision of Electoral Roads.
Gandhi framed his remarks around allegations of institutional bias, lack
(24:07):
of transparency and what he described as a reduced public
trust in electoral processes.
Speaker 8 (24:14):
The biggest anti national act you can do is vot
should there is no bigger there's no bigger anti national
act that you can do. Then vote sure, because when
you when you destroy the vote, you destroy the fabric
of this country. You destroy modern India, you destroyed the
(24:36):
idea of India.
Speaker 1 (24:38):
As reported by the Indian Expresses minote cg and kas Parthak,
the opposition parties used the debate to demand a return
to paper ballots and question the impartiality of the EC.
While most opposition parties supported reverting to paper ballots, the
Trinumul Congress and Sharapawa's NCP did not take a position
on EVMS. Congress MP moneyvari argued for one hundred percent
(25:02):
VVPAT verification or a switch to paper ballots, while Gandhi
limited his demand to seeking opposition access to the EVM architecture.
Gandhi reiterated his earlier allegations of vote theft and claimed
the RSS and BJP were attempting to capture India's institutional framework,
including the EC. He argued that the EC was colluding
(25:23):
with those in power to shape the elections. During the debate,
he raised three main questions. First, why the Chief Justice
of India was removed from the selection panel appointing election commissioners. Second,
why are twenty twenty three law grants immunity to serving
or former election commissioners for actions taken in office? And lastly,
(25:45):
why the EC changed rules to allow destruction of CCTV
footage forty five days after election results. He also claimed
that election campaigns were being aligned with the Prime Minister's
requirements and repeated his assertion that the Yana election was stolen,
alleging that the EC ensured the outcome. Meanwhile, speakers from
(26:05):
the sp DMK Udhavas Shivshena echoed criticism of EVMS and
supported a returned to paper ballot, while others questioned the
legality of the SII exercise. You were listening to Three
Things by the Indian Express. Today's show was edited and
mixed by Seshavar and produced by Shishanghgov and me Ichasharma.
(26:28):
If you like the show, do subscribe to us wherever
you get your podcast. You can also recommend it to
someone you think may like it, with a friend or
in your family. This is the best way for people
to get to know about us. You can also tweet
us at Express podcast or write to us at podcast
at Indian Express dot com.
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.
The Brothers Ortiz
The Brothers Ortiz is the story of two brothers–both successful, but in very different ways. Gabe Ortiz becomes a third-highest ranking officer in all of Texas while his younger brother Larry climbs the ranks in Puro Tango Blast, a notorious Texas Prison gang. Gabe doesn’t know all the details of his brother’s nefarious dealings, and he’s made a point not to ask, to protect their relationship. But when Larry is murdered during a home invasion in a rented beach house, Gabe has no choice but to look into what happened that night. To solve Larry’s murder, Gabe, and the whole Ortiz family, must ask each other tough questions.