Na Ladprao beer hall owner charged after blaze killed 37 and injured 77. Police traced the fire to modified electrics that ignited soundproofing, while tables and locked exits hampered escape. Seven case files have now gone to public prosecutors.
Police have charged the owner of Bangkok’s Na Ladprao beer hall after a devastating fire killed 37 people and injured 77. A seven-file investigation involving 211 witnesses traced the July 12 blaze to electrical modifications which sparked a short circuit and ignited soundproofing. Police also found tables obstructing escape routes and emergency exits blocked, locked or failing legal requirements. Owner Suwicha Salaibat, 45, remains in intensive care and has yet to be questioned. Meanwhile, the disaster has triggered a Bangkok-wide crackdown, with 739 of 948 entertainment venues inspected ordered to improve safety or cease operations.
Police have completed their investigation into the Na Ladprao beer hall fire and charged its 45-year-old owner with serious offences. The July 12 blaze killed 37 people and injured another 77. Investigators have now sent seven case files to public prosecutors for consideration of an indictment.
Pol Maj Gen Kiatikul Sonthinen, Commander of Metropolitan Police Division 2, confirmed the investigation had been concluded. In total, police questioned 211 witnesses while assembling evidence.
They included employees, customers, victims’ relatives, experts and forensic officers. Investigators also examined the premises and gathered technical evidence concerning the fire.
Owner remains in intensive care as police trace fire to modified electrical system and blocked exits
At the centre of the case is venue owner Suwicha Salaibat, 45. Police identified him as responsible for the incident following their investigation. However, detectives have still been unable to question him directly. Mr Suwicha remains in intensive care at Paolo Kaset Hospital following the fire.
Despite that, investigators completed their work using witness statements, forensic findings and evidence recovered from the venue. Their findings established an electrical short circuit as the cause of the fire. Crucially, police traced that short circuit to modifications made to the venue’s electrical system.
The electrical fault produced sparks which reached soundproofing materials inside the premises. Subsequently, those materials ignited and the fire spread rapidly through the beer hall. Police also examined why customers and employees encountered difficulties escaping from the building.
Investigators found significant problems with the venue’s internal layout. Numerous tables obstructed movement through the premises during the emergency. Meanwhile, several doors designated as emergency exits could not function as required. Some were locked or blocked, while others failed to comply with legal requirements.
Police focus on safety failures as owner faces charges over deaths, injuries and property damage
As part of the inquiry, investigators reconstructed conditions inside the venue when the fire broke out. They examined the arrangement of tables and the positioning of emergency exits. Furthermore, officers questioned employees and customers about safety arrangements inside the beer hall.
Their testimony supported police findings concerning the owner’s responsibility for safety precautions. Pol Maj Gen Kiatikul said Mr Suwicha failed to exercise reasonable care expected from this type of operator. Accordingly, investigators concluded that the evidence supported criminal proceedings against the owner.
Police also investigated whether Mr Suwicha’s four business partners shared responsibility for managing the establishment. All four were questioned during the investigation. Nevertheless, officers found no evidence linking them to management of the premises. The completed criminal case therefore focuses on Mr Suwicha.
Investigators said Mr Suwicha owned the beer hall personally and through a legal entity. His charges cover the deaths, injuries and property damage arising from the disaster. In addition, police charged him with operating an entertainment venue without the required permission.
One offence concerns causing a fire through negligence. It carries imprisonment of up to seven years and a maximum fine of ฿140,000. More seriously, negligence resulting in death carries imprisonment of up to ten years. That offence also carries a maximum fine of ฿200,000.
Serious injury and property damage offences added as police complete case against beer hall owner
Separately, negligence resulting in serious injury carries imprisonment of up to three years. It also carries a maximum ฿60,000 fine. Another offence concerns negligence causing physical or mental harm. The stated penalty reaches one month’s imprisonment and a maximum fine of ฿10,000.
Police have additionally cited an offence involving property damage. However, the supplied police accounts differ slightly over the total number of offences. One account states that Mr Suwicha faces six offences. Another describes five serious charges, including operating an entertainment venue without permission.
In either account, investigators have identified Mr Suwicha as the person facing prosecution. His four partners have not been linked to management of the business. Police have therefore submitted the completed evidence against the owner for consideration by prosecutors.
Pol Col Issara Rong, identified as head of the investigation team, said officers had worked continuously on the case. Throughout the inquiry, investigators concentrated heavily on establishing how the fire began. They also examined why it spread so quickly and how conditions affected evacuation.
Forensic evidence traces fire to electrical modifications as blocked exits and tables hampered escape
Forensic findings eventually traced the starting point to the modified electrical system. Specifically, investigators concluded those alterations caused the short circuit. Sparks from the fault then ignited soundproofing materials. From there, flames spread rapidly through the premises.
At the same time, police established that the internal layout hampered escape. Tables restricted movement towards exits as people attempted to leave. More critically, some doors intended for emergency use were locked or obstructed. Others were positioned or operated in ways that failed legal requirements.
Notably, investigators did not rely solely on physical evidence from the venue. Statements from employees and customers provided further information about conditions inside the business. Experts and forensic officers also supplied technical evidence. Relatives of victims were among the 211 witnesses questioned.
The July 12 fire ultimately claimed 37 lives. Significantly, the total includes victims who initially survived but later died in hospital. Another 77 people suffered burn injuries. Those casualties formed a central part of the criminal case prepared against the owner.
Bangkok inspections find hundreds of entertainment venues need improvements or face closure
On another front, the disaster triggered a major safety inspection campaign across Bangkok’s entertainment sector. Bangkok Metropolitan Administration teams began checking venues one week after the fire. Between July 19 and August 4, officials inspected 948 establishments across the capital.
The results showed hundreds of businesses required action. Only 209 of the inspected establishments met the required safety standards. By contrast, another 632 were ordered to make improvements after inspectors found deficiencies. A further 107 establishments were ordered to cease operations.
Consequently, 739 of the 948 inspected venues either required improvements or received closure orders. The checks covered 17 separate safety criteria. These included fire prevention, hygiene and building safety requirements.
Bangkok Deputy Governor Pornphrom Vikitsreth said operators could rectify deficiencies that were not considered critical. However, serious safety violations would result in legal action. The inspection programme has proceeded alongside the criminal case arising from the Na Ladprao fire.
Police clear four business partners of management role as evidence centres responsibility on owner
In parallel, investigators examined the business structure surrounding Mr Suwicha and his four partners. Police questioned each partner while determining who actually managed the venue. Ultimately, they found no evidence connecting the four with its management. Responsibility identified by investigators therefore remained with Mr Suwicha.
His continuing treatment at Paolo Kaset Hospital prevented police from completing one potentially significant interview. Even so, detectives concluded they had sufficient evidence to finish the investigation. They assembled the material into seven case files before forwarding them to prosecutors.
Taken together, the police findings establish the sequence investigators say caused the disaster. First, modifications to the electrical system produced a short circuit. Sparks then reached soundproofing materials and started the fire. The blaze subsequently spread rapidly through the venue.
Simultaneously, the premises presented significant obstacles to evacuation. Numerous tables restricted movement, while several designated emergency exits could not operate properly. Some were locked or blocked. Others failed to meet legal requirements.
Against that background, employee and customer testimony strengthened the findings concerning safety precautions. Forensic evidence established the origin and development of the blaze. Investigators then combined those findings with evidence concerning ownership and management.
Prosecutors receive seven case files as owner faces negligence charges over deaths, injuries and damage
As a result, police concluded their investigation with Mr Suwicha facing prosecution. The offences include negligence connected with deaths, serious injuries and other harm. Property damage and operating an entertainment venue without permission are also included in the supplied police accounts.
The case has now entered the prosecution stage. Public prosecutors will consider the seven files and determine the next legal steps against Mr Suwicha. Meanwhile, the 45-year-old owner remains in intensive care and has yet to be questioned.
No third party cover for Lat Phrao pub disaster victims but family will hand over any insurance payout
Female owner of Lat Phrao venue battles for her life in ICU as police pursue their probe into the horrific blaze
Beyond the criminal case, Bangkok’s inspection figures have revealed widespread deficiencies among entertainment venues checked since the tragedy. Officials inspected 948 establishments within little more than two weeks. Of those, only 209 met required standards without orders for corrective action.
In comparison, 632 venues were told to make improvements. Another 107 were ordered to cease operations. Those inspections followed a fire which killed 37 people and injured 77 others on July 12.
For police, however, the evidence-gathering phase is now finished. The seven case files contain testimony from 211 witnesses alongside forensic and technical findings. Prosecutors must now consider whether to proceed with the charges assembled against the Na Ladprao beer hall owner.
Join the Thai News forum, follow Thai Examiner on Facebook here
Receive all our stories as they come out on Telegram here
Follow Thai Examiner here
Further reading:
Heartbreak in Bangkok. 27 now confirmed dead in beer hall fire that flared before Midnight on Sunday
