SC Slams Madras HC’s Handling of Karur Stampede Case, Refuses to Modify CBI Probe Terms

The Supreme Court of India on Thursday intensified its scrutiny of the Madras High Court’s actions following the tragic Karur stampede, which claimed 41 lives during an event organized by actor-turned-politician Vijay’s Tamilaga Vetri Kazhagam (TVK).

A bench of Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Vijay Bishnoi observed that “something is wrong” with the manner the High Court dealt with the proceedings, particularly after examining a confidential report submitted by the Registrar General of the Madras HC.

SC Questions Procedural Irregularities

The Supreme Court expressed sharp concern over several procedural issues and conflicting orders from the High Court, particularly the conduct of the Chennai Bench:

• Jurisdictional Issue: Questioning why the Chennai Bench intervened in a matter originating in Karur, which falls under the jurisdiction of the Madurai Bench.
• Expansion of Scope: Asking how the Chennai Bench constituted a Special Investigation Team (SIT) comprised solely of Tamil Nadu police officers in a petition that merely sought guidelines for political rallies.
• Conflicting Orders: Noting the contradictory outcomes, where the Chennai Bench ordered the SIT, while the Madurai Bench on the same day refused to transfer the probe to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).

Justice Maheshwari explicitly commented on the Registrar General’s report, stating: “Something wrong is going on in the high court. This is not a right thing that is happening in the high court.”

No Change to CBI Probe Oversight

The bench strongly reiterated its October 13 order, which had transferred the investigation to the CBI and established a three-member supervisory committee headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice Ajay Rastogi.

• Refusal to Modify: The Court firmly rejected an oral plea to modify the specific term that requires Justice Rastogi to select two senior IPS officers from the Tamil Nadu cadre who are “not natives of the state.”
• Rationale: The court’s refusal to reconsider the phrase underscores its commitment to ensuring a fully impartial and independent investigation, a term that had previously caused political outrage in Tamil Nadu.
• Commission of Inquiry: The bench also did not vacate the stay on the state-appointed Commission of Inquiry, which is chaired by Justice Aruna Jagadeesan.

Tamil Nadu Government’s Grievance

The Tamil Nadu government, through Senior Advocate P. Wilson, maintained that the Supreme Court’s October 13 order—which transferred the investigation to the CBI—was an instance of “adjudication without pleadings.”

The state argued that it was denied a fair chance to present crucial factual material, such as permissions and crowd-control plans, before the CBI probe was ordered. The government also pointed out that the original petition by TVK did not even seek a CBI investigation.

---