Amazon India has opened an internal investigation into a fire that killed two workers at a partner warehouse in Haldwani, Uttarakhand, on June 5, 2026. The facility belonged to M&M Logistics Solutions, one of Amazon's third-party delivery partners, and reportedly lacked a valid fire safety clearance, fire alarms, smoke detectors, and a proper emergency exit.
Amazon said in a statement that it will take "appropriate action in line with our policies once the investigation is complete," tying any action against M&M Logistics to the outcome of the police inquiry. That sequencing matters: it means accountability for the partner is conditional on a state police process that has not yet concluded, and neither M&M Logistics nor Uttarakhand police have commented publicly.
The scale of M&M Logistics' role in Amazon's network makes the incident harder to dismiss as an isolated case. The company operates 45 Amazon delivery centres across 21 cities in northern India, making it a significant node in the last-mile supply chain. When a partner of that size runs a facility that allegedly had none of the basic fire safety infrastructure required under Indian law, it raises questions about how Amazon audits the physical conditions at partner sites, not just their operational output.
Workers Union Demands Judicial Inquiry
Amazon India issues a Seller Code of Conduct that requires vendors to maintain safe working conditions and allows for suspension or termination of contractors who violate safety standards. But the Amazon India Workers Union argues that internal policy is not enough. The union called the deaths a "grave failure of workplace safety and protection of human dignity" and demanded a judicial inquiry, pointing out on X that the two workers died trapped inside with no emergency exit.
A judicial inquiry, if ordered, would sit outside Amazon's internal process and could compel disclosure of safety audit records, inspection histories, and contractual terms between Amazon and M&M Logistics. That is a materially different level of scrutiny than an internal review.
The Haldwani incident is not an isolated data point. In 2025, the National Human Rights Commission sought a response from Amazon over labour law violations at one of its Delhi warehouses during extreme heat. The state government subsequently initiated legal action under labour laws. The pattern suggests that safety compliance in Amazon's Indian logistics network has been a persistent gap, not a one-off failure.
Warehouse Fires Expose a Wider Supply Chain Problem
The broader ecommerce and quick-service restaurant sector has faced a run of warehouse fire incidents. In January 2026, three employees of Wow! Momo died after a fire spread from a neighbouring facility to the QSR chain's warehouse in Kolkata. The Calcutta High Court took suo motu cognisance of the case, and West Bengal Police arrested the warehouse manager and deputy manager on negligence charges. A month later, pet care startup Supertails lost its entire inventory when a fire at a neighbouring perfume warehouse in Bengaluru spread to its leased storage unit. No employees were hurt, but the company was forced to cancel its flagship sale and relocate operations.
These incidents share a common thread: warehouses operating in close proximity, often in areas with mixed industrial use, where a fire safety failure at one unit can cascade to others. For ecommerce companies that rely heavily on third-party logistics partners and leased facilities, the practical implication is that their exposure to fire risk extends well beyond their own directly managed assets.
For Amazon India specifically, the next pressure points are the Uttarakhand police investigation and the workers union's push for a judicial inquiry. If the police finding confirms that M&M Logistics operated without mandatory safety certifications, Amazon's stated policy of suspension or termination for safety violations would be directly tested. The outcome will signal whether the company's Seller Code of Conduct is enforced in practice or functions mainly as a contractual shield.