In response to the evidence of systemic failure, an FIR naming Agarwal was filed at the Dabhra police station under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita sections 106 for causing death by negligence, 289 for negligent conduct with respect to machinery, and 3(5) regarding common intention. Sakti Superintendent of Police Prafull Thakur confirmed to PTI that eight to ten individuals, including Anil Agarwal and management official Devendra Patel, have been named in the FIR, noting that additional names may be added as the investigation identifies further responsible parties.
The move to hold the billionaire chairman accountable was met with immediate resistance from Naveen Jindal, who described naming Agarwal before a full investigation as a move that raises serious concerns. Jindal characterized Agarwal as a self-made man from a humble and backward community background who built a global enterprise from scratch, arguing that the chairman had no role in the specific plant's operations. Drawing a comparison to the public sector, Jindal questioned if chairmen are named when accidents occur in PSU plants or the Railways, asserting that the same standard must apply to the private sector. While he described the incident as deeply painful and called for proper compensation and livelihood support for the victim families, his defense of the Vedanta boss triggered intense criticism.
The backlash was led by Pravesh Jain, Chairman of Paras Group of Companies, who slammed Jindal’s stance as a betrayal of the blood on the factory floor. Jain demanded to know where Jindal’s heart was as twenty families in Chhattisgarh remain shattered with fathers, husbands, and sons blown to pieces. He accused Jindal of choosing corporate solidarity over grieving mothers and suggested that instead of tweeting in defense of a billionaire, Jindal should have contacted his own government's Chief Minister. Further criticism arrived from social media users like Baazigar Bhau, who argued that owners must be held vigilant as they own the profits and set the budgets for maintenance and safety. As groups like Think India joined the chorus of condemnation, the incident has evolved from a local industrial disaster into a national debate over whether top-tier corporate leadership should bear the ultimate legal responsibility when cost-cutting or negligence leads to the loss of human life.
About The Author
Comment List