Prayagraj Cold Storage Collapse Case: Court Grants Bail to Former Minister’s Son Amid Ongoing Legal Proceedings
By Rajesh Pandey
A Prayagraj court has granted bail to Manzoor Ahmad, the son of former Uttar Pradesh minister Ansar Ahmad, in connection with the tragic cold storage collapse that claimed four lives earlier this year.
The incident, which occurred on March 23, 2026, in the Phaphamau area of Prayagraj, shocked the region and raised serious concerns about industrial safety and accountability.
The accident took place at Adarsh Cold Storage, where a portion of the facility suddenly collapsed, trapping workers inside.
Four labourers lost their lives in the disaster, while nearly 14 others sustained injuries of varying severity.
The situation became even more alarming when ammonia gas reportedly began leaking from the premises shortly after the collapse, prompting emergency response teams to rush to the site and undertake rescue and containment operations.
The bail order was issued by Sessions Judge Satya Prakash Tripathi after hearing detailed arguments presented by the defence counsel representing Manzoor Ahmad as well as submissions made by the prosecution on behalf of the state government.
Following consideration of both sides, the court allowed the bail application, providing relief to the accused while the trial process continues.
Manzoor Ahmad is not the first individual connected to the case to secure bail. Earlier, several employees associated with the cold storage facility, including Mohammad Irfan, Mohammad Jabir, Allauddin and Mohammad Usman, had also been granted bail by the court.
Their release came after judicial scrutiny of their respective roles and the evidence presented during the investigation.
The criminal case originated from a First Information Report (FIR) filed by Sub-Inspector Kambod Singh.
According to the complaint, the disaster was allegedly triggered by an explosion involving an ammonia gas chamber within the cold storage complex.
Investigators initially focused on determining whether negligence, safety violations or operational lapses contributed to the catastrophic failure of the facility.
The FIR named a total of 12 individuals in connection with the incident.
Among the seven specifically identified accused were former Samajwadi Party MLA and former Uttar Pradesh minister Ansar Ahmad, who owned the cold storage facility, along with manager Usman, Manzoor Ahmad, Javed, Allauddin, Mohammad Irfan and Mohammad Aslam Baba.
The complaint also referred to four or five unidentified individuals whose roles were to be investigated further.
Given the severity of the tragedy, police invoked multiple provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, including Section 103, which pertains to murder, along with provisions of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932, and several other serious charges.
The inclusion of stringent sections reflected the gravity with which authorities viewed the deaths of the workers and the circumstances surrounding the collapse.
The incident had triggered widespread public concern at the time, particularly because many of the victims were daily wage labourers who had reported to work expecting an ordinary day.
Families of the deceased and injured workers demanded a thorough investigation and strict action against anyone found responsible for negligence or safety violations.
The ammonia leak that followed the collapse also heightened fears among nearby residents, forcing authorities to take precautionary measures to prevent further harm.
Legal experts note that the grant of bail does not amount to a determination of innocence or guilt. Rather, it allows the accused to remain out of custody while legal proceedings continue.
The investigation and subsequent trial will ultimately determine the extent of responsibility, if any, of the individuals named in the case.
As the judicial process moves forward, the cold storage collapse remains one of the most significant industrial accidents reported in Prayagraj in recent years.
Families of the victims continue to seek justice, while authorities are expected to pursue accountability and examine whether lapses in safety protocols contributed to the deadly disaster.
The case is likely to remain under close public scrutiny as courts assess evidence, hear witness testimonies and determine responsibility for a tragedy that claimed lives, injured workers and left lasting questions about workplace safety and regulatory oversight.
