"Gas station explosion" in Kokdala: court document records 9 deaths
The explosion and fire that occurred on July 16, 2025, at a gas filling station in the Kokdala district of the Qashqadaryo region

"Gas Station Explosion" in Kokdala: Court Document Records 9 Deaths
The criminal case regarding the explosion and fire that occurred on July 16, 2025, at a gas filling station in the Kokdala district of the Qashqadaryo region was reviewed by the court of audit instance. The court documents state that 9 people died and another 20 people sustained various degrees of bodily injuries as a result of the incident.
This figure differs from the initially released official information. On the day of the incident, the Ministry of Emergency Situations reported that 4 citizens had died as a result of the fire. However, subsequent court documents indicate the number of victims as 9. The discrepancy between the figures was not specifically explained in the ruling of the audit instance.
The incident occurred on July 16, 2025, at around 14:40 at a liquefied gas distribution station for the population in the Kokdala district.
Initially, the Ministry of Emergency Situations reported that a flash occurred in the fuel storage tank, followed by a fire. Four fire and rescue crews were dispatched to the scene, and the fire was extinguished.
The court documents note that a significant part of the criminal case is also related to the falsification of documents. According to the ruling, although the responsible persons knew that the construction of the gas station did not meet the requirements of the current approved project, they prepared false certificates stating that the construction and installation works were carried out in accordance with the project documents. In particular, although the project specified that the tanks were to be installed underground, in practice they were placed above ground, safe distances from buildings were not maintained, and the compressors and electro-contact pressure gauges specified in the project were not installed. Despite this, in 2016 and on December 15, 2021, certificates on the compliance of the facility with the project were prepared, and based on these documents, the station received five-year licenses in 2017 and 2022.
In addition, the court materials indicate that although the tanks were not actually subjected to appropriate testing, false entries were made in their technical passports stating that water tests had been conducted in 2016, 2018, 2020, 2022, and 2024. In 2021, false information was also recorded stating that the thickness of the tank metal had undergone expert examination. The ruling notes that the owner of the station used these documents knowing they were forged.
At the same time, some technological equipment at the gas distribution station belonging to "JShB" LLC (the company name has been abbreviated - Ed.) did not correspond to the project documents. It was noted that there was a welded spot on one of the tanks, pressure was increased through the compressor, the valves on the safety relief valves were closed, and electro-contact pressure gauges serving to stop the technological process were not installed.
For this reason, the pressure inside the tank exceeded its endurance limit, and an explosion occurred. The court materials state that the fire spread to the surroundings, affecting another container intended for gas storage as well as facilities near the station.
The explosion was so powerful that one of the liquefied gas storage tanks at the gas distribution station was launched upward by the impact and landed in the courtyard of the "Movarounnahr" family restaurant located next to the station. According to the court document, the fire then continued on the restaurant's territory, and the scale of the incident expanded. The investigation materials cite the following reasons for the explosion: the integrity of the tank was compromised and it was used with a welded patch, which reduced its pressure resistance; pressure was increased through the compressor; the valves on the relief safety valves installed on the tank were closed; the air temperature was high; and electro-contact pressure gauges designed to automatically stop the technological process were not installed. As a result, the pressure inside the tank exceeded its endurance limit, and the explosion occurred.
The ruling indicates that 9 people died as a result of the explosion and fire.
Additionally, 20 citizens who were at the scene sustained various degrees of bodily injuries and were hospitalized.
As a result of the fire, a number of facilities around the gas station were also damaged. The court materials mention residential housing, the building of the "Movarounnahr" teahouse, a greenhouse, a shopping center, and facilities belonging to the "Hududgaz Qashqadaryo" gas supply branch.
The court document also notes that after the incident, 1 billion 550 million soums were allocated from budget funds to support the families of the victims and the deceased.
Initially, a criminal case was initiated regarding the incident under Article 205 of the Criminal Code — abuse of power or official authority, and Article 259 — violation of fire safety rules.
During the investigation, the scope of the case expanded, and the actions of certain officials were also given a legal assessment under Articles 207, 208, and 209 of the Criminal Code.
The Kokdala District Court rendered a verdict on the case on March 19, 2026. Later, on July 7, 2026, the judicial panel for criminal cases of the Qashqadaryo Regional Court overturned the verdict of the first instance and adopted a new verdict.
The appellate instance reclassified the charges against some defendants and imposed restriction of liberty sentences.
In particular, the court document shows that B.I. was ultimately sentenced to 3 years, 6 months, and 28 days of restriction of liberty, as well as deprivation of the right to hold certain positions.
The criminal actions of Sh.B. were reclassified under Article 207 of the Criminal Code, and he was also sentenced to restriction of liberty. E.I. was sentenced under Article 208.
One of the important aspects of the case relates to the issue of compensation for material damage.
In order to compensate for the damage caused by the crime, close relatives of the deceased Sh.J. (the owner of the "methane gas station" - Ed.) paid 4 billion 250 million soums into the deposit account of the Qashqadaryo Regional Prosecutor's Office.
The appellate court had ordered the distribution of these funds among a number of victims and organizations:
– To the Kokdala district khokimiyat – 1 billion 550 million soums (for the families of the deceased and injured);
– To the "Hududgaz Qashqadaryo" gas supply branch – 535 million 808 thousand 566 soums;
– To cover bank credit debt – 1 billion 612 million soums;
– To the owners of damaged vehicles – 85 million soums, 19 million 743 thousand 250 soums, and 13 million 612 thousand 436 soums;
– Recovery of 433 million 835 thousand 748 soums in favor of another civil plaintiff was also envisaged.
However, on October 2, 2026, the judicial panel for criminal cases of the Samarkand Regional Court reviewed the case in the order of audit and modified the part of the appellate verdict specifically related to the recovery of material damage.
The court based this on the fact that the criminal case against the deceased Sh.J. had been terminated due to his death, without the issue of guilt being resolved.
According to the conclusion of the audit instance, it is incorrect to distribute funds paid by the relatives of a person whose guilt has not been established by a court verdict among the victims within the framework of a criminal case.
Therefore, the part of the appellate verdict regarding the distribution of 4 billion 250 million soums to the victims and plaintiffs was annulled.
The court ordered the return of these 4.25 billion soums to the close relatives of the deceased Sh.J. The affected individuals and organizations were explained their right to file claims in civil courts to pursue their demands.
The audit instance left the other parts of the appellate verdict, including the legal assessment and sentences given to the defendants, unchanged. The appeal was dismissed.

