Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam vs P.H. Dinesh

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL/CIVIL APPELLATE/ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL) NO(S). OF 2025 [Diary No. 58048/2025]

TAMILAGA VETTRI KAZHAGAM PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

P.H. DINESH & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) WITH

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO(S). OF 2025 [Diary No. 57588/2025]

PANNEERSELVAM PITCHAIMUTHU PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)

WRIT PETITION (CRL) NO(S). 412 OF 2025

S PRABAKARAN PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)

WRIT PETITION (CRL) NO(S). 413 OF 2025

SELVARAJ P PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS Signature Not Verified

THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS. Digitally signed by NIDHI AHUJA RESPONDENT(S) Date: 2025.10.13 16:57:17 IST Reason: SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL) NO(S). 16081 OF 2025

G S MANI PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS. RESPONDENT(S)

ORDER

1. In the present set of matters, Special Leave Petition Diary No.

58048 of 2025 has been filed against the order of the learned Single

Judge of the Madras High Court dated 3.10.2025 passed in Writ

Petition Criminal No. 1000 of 2025, challenging the direction for

formation of a Special Investigation Team (hereinafter referred to as

“SIT”).

2. Special Leave Petition Diary No. 57588 of 2025 has been filed

challenging the order dated 03.10.2025 in WP(MD) No. 27556 of 2025

passed by the Division Bench of the Madras High Court, Madurai

Bench, whereby the batch of writ petitions filed by some public-

spirited citizens seeking directions to transfer the investigation to the

Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter “CBI”) were dismissed.

Petitioner in this case is a father whose son died in the unfortunate

incident and was not a party before the High Court, he has sought

2 permission to file the instant special leave petition.

3. Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 16081 of 2025 has been

filed against the judgment dated 03.10.2025 passed by the division

bench of the Madras High Court, Madurai bench in WP(MD) No. 27571

of 2025, rejecting the prayer for transfer of investigation to the CBI.

The petitioner in the said case was not a victim / relative of victim of

the incident, but is a public-spirited citizen.

4. Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 412 of 2025 under Article 32 of the

Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner whose sister and

her fiancé have died in the incident; while making several allegations,

the petitioner has prayed for CBI investigation. The Writ Petition

(Criminal) No. 413 of 2025 under Article 32 of the Constitution of

India has been filed by the petitioner whose wife has died in the

incident, seeking similar prayer.

5. After perusal of the facts and circumstances of the case, we issue

notice in all the five cases returnable in eight weeks.

6. Heard on the question of grant of interim relief.

7. All the above cases relate to an unfortunate incident of stampede

3 / crowd crush which occurred on 27.09.2025 at about 7.30 P.M. in

Velusamypuram, Karur District, Tamil Nadu (hereinafter referred to as

the “Karur stampede”).

8. The Karur stampede resulted in loss of 41 innocent lives and

causing injuries to more than 100 persons during a political rally

organized at Velusamypuram in Karur District, Tamil Nadu by the

Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam, a regional political party (hereinafter

referred to as “TVK”). Purported permission to conduct the said rally

as requested by the TVK was granted by the Deputy Superintendent of

Police, Karur Town Sub-Division vide letter dated 26.09.2025. The

TVK was headed by Thiru Vijay (a renowned Tamil actor) who was set

to visit the locality for a public meeting. In order to attend the said

rally and meeting, huge crowd gathered at the spot to see him.

9. In consequence, on the fateful day of the rally and meeting,

Karur stampede took place. In the aftermath of the unfortunate

incident, FIR No. 855/2025 was registered on 27.09.2025 in Police

Station Karur Town under Sections 105, 110, 125B, 223 of the

Bhartiya Nayaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as “BNS”) read

with Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of

Damage and Loss) Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as “TNPP Act”).

4 The investigation was initiated by the police, and immediately on the

same date, i.e. 27.09.2025, by means of a ‘press release’ Hon’ble The

Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu announced the formation of a one-

member Enquiry Commission headed by a retired High Court Judge,

Ms. Justice Aruna Jagadeeshan.

10. While the things stood as thus in motion, on 30.09.2025 Writ

Petition (MD) Nos. 27556, 27563 and 27571 of 2025 were filed before

the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court. The prayers made in

the respective Writ Petitions are quoted hereunder:

WP(MD) No. 27556/2025:

“A. To direct the 3 and 4 respondents to order the 8 respondent to conduct Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) enquiry to find the truth behind at least 39 people died in a stampede at a Tamil Nadu Karur District Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) party rally. More than 80 were injured on Saturday (September 27, 2025)

B. To pay Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs) as compensation to find the truth behind at least 39 people died in a stampede at a Tamil Nadu Karur District Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) Party rally. More than 80 were injured on Saturday (September 27, 2025)

C. To pay Rs. 10 lakh compensation to those injured in the stampede and undergoing treatment in hospitals (September, 27, 2025).

D. By considering the petitioner’s representation dated 28.09.2025 and pass such furtheror other orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

WP(MD) No. 27563/2025:

5

To issue a Writ of mandamus, to direct the 1st respondent in appointing the 2nd respondent to investigate, enquire and punish in the Road Show meet held by the TamizhagaVetriKhazagam actor turned Politician Vijay at Velusamypuram, Karur District on 26th September, 2025.

WP(MD) No. 27571/2025:

To issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st to 5th Respondents to transfer the investigation in FIR in Crime No. 855 of 2025 registered at Karur Town Police Station concerning the stampede death of 41 persons in the public meeting of Actor Vijay at Karur on 27.09.2025 to 7th and 8th Respondents Central Bureau of Investigation CBI or a Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by a retired/sitting Judges of the Honble Supreme Court of India.”

11. Writ Petition (MD) Nos. 27532, 27540, 27541 and 27554 of 2025

have also been filed on the same date, i.e. 30.09.2025 before the

Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court. The prayers made in the

respective Writ Petitions are quoted hereunder:

WP(MD) No. 27532/2025:

“To issue Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to draft and implement necessary and appropriate safety protocols and Standard Operating Procedures for all public gatherings, rallies and meetings to be conducted by and political party or such other organisation, which would draw public crowd.

WP(MD) No. 27540/2025:

To issue a Writ of mandamus, directing the Respondents 1 to 4 to frame and notify appropriate rules, regulations, standard operating procedure (SOP’s) for regulating political rallies, roadshows, conferences and other mass gatherings in Tamil Nadu by adopting the crowd management guidelines issued by the NDMA (National Disaster Management Authority), NIDM (National Institute

6 for Disaster Management) and BPRD (Bureau for Police Research and Development), thereby mandating the imposition of stringent regulations which are legally enforceable on the organizers of such rally in order to ensure adequate safety and precautionary measures, with appropriate guidelines for the collection of safety deposits, indemnity bonds, enrolment of group insurance scheme from such organizers/political parties who intend to organize such rallies. The congregations to ensure compensation for victims who may suffer irreparable injury and loss of life in the event of any untoward incidents that may happen, by considering the petitioner’s representation dated 29.09.2025 within a time limit that may be fixed by this Court.

WP(MD) No. 27541/2025:

To issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 5 not to accord permission to 6th respondent party to conduct meeting within the Tirunelveli District, until the completion inquiry, based on the petitioner’s representation dated 29.09.2025.

WP(MD) No. 27554/2025:

To issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondent No.1 to 5 to frame Comprehensive Guidelines or Rules for Crowd control and Mass Gathering Management in Tamil Nadu and to pass such other or further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of this case and thus render justice.”

12. From the above, it can be gathered that various writ petitions

were filed before the Madurai Bench of the High Court of Madras

because Karur town falls within the jurisdiction of the Madurai Bench

as prayed in those cases, it was cognizant of the Karur stampede, the

prayer for formulating the Standard Operating Procedure (hereinafter

referred to as “SOP”) along with guidelines for political rallies, road

shows, public meetings, etc. and also of the prayer seeking CBI

investigation in the matter was also prayed.

7

13. During the course of hearing, it has been brought to the notice of

this Court that earlier, WP Crl. No. 884 of 2025 was filed on 16.9.2025

before the Principal Bench of the Madras High Court by the TVK

seeking the following relief:

“Directing the Respondent to forthwith instruct all subordinate police officials throughout the state of Tamil Nadu to consider and grant necessary permissions to the petitioner party for conducting political campaigns led by its party leader, Mr. Vijay Across the state of Tamil Nadu between 20.09.2025 to 20.12.2025 on the basis of the petitioners political party representation dated 09.09.2025 by the consideration of the Representation of the petitioner dated 15.09.2025 in a fair, uniform and non - discriminatory manner, within a time frame fixed by this Hon'ble Court and in accordance with law.”

14. Surprisingly, the learned Single Judge of the Madras High Court

Main Seat, without adverting to the prayer made in the WP Crl. No.

884 of 2025, vide interim order dated 18.09.2025, directed that the

State Government to come up with the guidelines with regards to

collection of security deposit from the political parties which intend to

have huge public meetings, gatherings or demonstrations. The Court

vide subsequent order dated 24.09.2025 suo moto directed to join the

Chief Secretary and the Home Secretary of Govt. of Tamil Nadu as

parties. On the said date, the Court disapproved the affidavit dated

23.09.2025 filed by the State inter-alia stating that for preparing the

8 guidelines for collection of security deposit, several departments were

required to be kept on board which may take some time, however, it

was stated that the Government is addressing the issue. The report

regarding formulation of the guidelines was also sought for by the

Court while posting the matter on 16.10.2025.

15. While the said petition was pending, the Karur stampede took

place and one WP Crl. No. 1000 of 2025 was also filed on 30.09.2025

before the Main Seat of the Madras High Court seeking the following

relief :-

“To issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 30.09.2025 submitted by the petitioner and consequently framed guidelines in the nature of SOP for the conducting of road show immediately and thus render justice.”

16. In the said case, limited relief sought was relating to formation of

the SOP and to consider the representation of the petitioner. It is not

out of place that factum of dismissal of Writ Petitions seeking

investigation by the CBCID and for payment of compensation by the

Division Bench of the Madras High Court, Madurai Bench was

brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge by the learned

Additional Advocate General as it appears from paragraph 3 of the

impugned order. However, the Court in para 19 took cognizance of

9 the order dated 03.10.2025 passed in WP (MD) No. 27532 of 2025 and

batch with respect to an undertaking given by the State for not

granting permission for rallies on State Highways/National Highways

till formation of SOP. In consequence thereof the learned Single Judge

disposed of the WP Crl. 1000/2025 in terms of the impugned order.

17. After perusal of pleadings and reliefs, learned Single Judge has

suo moto decided to enlarge the scope of the writ petition, stating

extraordinary circumstances require extraordinary measures, even in

absence of pleadings and prayer for constitution of SIT. Learned Single

Judge made some observations about the Karur stampede. In the writ

petition, the TVK and its members were not made party and without

joining the necessary parties and affording opportunity, the order

impugned has been passed. In result, as per said order, the Court

took suo moto cognizance and recorded the finding of non-satisfaction

with respect to progress or independence of the investigation and

directed for the formation of SIT consisting of the officers of the State.

The judgement is completely silent about how learned Single Judge

arrived at such a conclusion and what material was perused by the

Court. The said order mainly refers the submissions made by the Ld.

Additional Advocate General.

10

18. It is not out of place to observe that the orders passed in the

various writ petitions except Writ Petition No. 884 of 2025 were dated

03.10.2025. The order of the Division Bench of the Madras High

Court, Madurai Bench in WP (MD) No. 27532 of 2025 and batch,

taking cognizance of the aforesaid order, made the observation that

learned Single Judge of the Madras High Court at Chennai is seized of

the matter relating to the formation of SOP in WP Crl. No. 884 of 2025,

therefore, refused to consider the prayer for formation of SOP. In our

view, where the prayer to form SOP / Guidelines for public rallies

affecting general public at large was being examined, however, such

petition ought to be dealt with by the Division Bench, registering as

public interest litigation in right earnest, and not to be dealt with by a

Single Bench.

19. It is also strange that in the above two Writ Petition Criminal

Nos. 884 and 1000 of 2025, learned Single Judges of the Main Seat of

the Madras High Court entertained the writ petition for the prayers

which were not made in the writ petitions, and expanded the scope

without any foundation in pleadings. It is also not forthcoming as to

what was the need to increase the multiplicity of proceedings with

respect to the same cause, subject matter and seeking similar prayers.

11 In both cases, the learned Single Judge proceeded to take suo moto

cognizance of the issues beyond the prayer and formed the SIT in WP

Crl. No. 1000 of 2025, further asking the formation of the guidelines /

SOP.

20. Pertinently, the Karur stampede falls within the jurisdiction of

the Madurai Bench where, writ petitions, seeking investigation by the

CBI and also formation of SIT were filed and heard by a Division

Bench on the same date. Such being the case, there was no occasion

for the learned Single Judge of the Main Seat of the Madras High

Court to entertain WP Crl. No. 1000 of 2025, without orders of the

Chief Justice of the High Court in that regard. On a query being put,

how WP Crl. No. 1000 of 2025 was filed, referring the Karur

stampede, before the Main Seat of the Madras High Court, in reply it

was submitted that WP Crl. No. 884 of 2025 for the formation of

SOP/guidelines before the Main Seat was pending, therefore, the Main

Seat may have entertained the aforementioned WP for the same relief.

Be that as it may, the subsequent petition in WP Crl. No. 1000 of 2025

was filed for formation of the SOP / Guidelines for which a petition

was already pending as stated before us. Therefore, learned Single

Judge did not have any occasion to entertain the said writ petition and

12 it ought to have dismissed the petition. But by taking suo moto

cognizance even during pendency of writ petitions before the Madurai

bench within whose jurisdiction the incident took place and also

ignoring that Hon’ble the Chief Minister of the State has already

constituted an Enquiry Commission comprising of a retired Judge of

the High Court, how far the order of the learned Single Judge was

correct in taking suo moto cognizance and creating a SIT, is an issue.

21. It is not understandable to us, particularly when in WP (MD) Nos.

27556, 27563 and 27571 of 2025 prayers were made for transfer of

investigation to CBI and/or formation of SIT, and the Division Bench

at Madurai was cognizant of the same and said that the investigation

is at a nascent stage and no flaw in the police investigation has been

brought. In stark contradiction, the learned Single Judge, while

dealing with the matter, of constituting a SIT, suo moto, without

referring any documents or assigning any reasons recorded

dissatisfaction with the progress and independence of the

investigation. Thus, from the above, it is clear that the Division Bench

at Madurai denied the CBI investigation, holding that the investigation

by the local police is not flawed, while the learned Single Judge at the

Main Seat, dissatisfied with the police investigation, directed for

13 constitution of SIT. Such recourse prima facie indicates the lack of

sensitivity and propriety to deal with such a matter creating

multiplicity of proceedings, for the reasons best known to the Hon’ble

Judges.

22. It is to be noted that in Writ Petition (MD) Nos. 27532, 27540,

27541 and 27554 of 2025 prayer for safety protocols and SOP for all

public gathering, rallies and meetings by the political party along with

other ancillary issues were raised with specific prayers as referred

above, but those have been closed due to pendency of WP Crl. No. 884

of 2025 and in terms of the undertaking of the Additional Advocate

General. It is true that those orders have not been assailed in the

present batch of matters, but the fact remains that the prayer asking

for SOP because of the Karur stampede was not entertained in those

cases by the Division Bench merely because WP Crl. 884 of 2025 was

pending, though it was not a public interest litigation and no

foundation has been set out in the pleadings of the said case. In fact,

the said issue is under consideration in terms of the order of the Court

which has expanded the scope of the Writ Petition. In the opinion of

this Court, dismissal of the said batch of Writ Petitions by the Division

Bench in which specific pleadings were set out asking the relief of

14 formation of SOP due to the pendency of WP Crl. 884 of 2025 cannot

be appreciated to be in right earnest. At the same time, as per the

allegations raised with respect to impartiality and independence of the

investigation, prima facie, the prayer for CBI investigation has not

been duly dealt with in right perspective after hearing learned counsel

for the parties at length.

23. All the above observations are prima facie and are interim in

nature and subject to filing of the counter affidavit by the

Respondents.

24. The above is a matter of concern and it is required to be

explained by the High Court that a writ petition praying for formation

of SOP / Guidelines for the rallies of political parties and roadshows,

how far it would fall within the jurisdiction of Writ Petition (Criminal).

It shall also be explained that in WP Crl. No. 884 of 2025 which was

filed for different relief but as per the orders of the High Court it was

kept pending for formation of the SOP/guidelines, why the said matter

was not treated as Public Interest Litigation (PIL) and whether it will

be listed before the learned Single Judge or the Division Bench. An

explanation in that regard be furnished by the Registrar (Judicial) of

15 the High Court bringing this order in the knowledge of Hon’ble the

Chief Justice of the High Court.

25. In addition to the nature of the orders passed by the High Court

as discussed, the other side of the Karur stampede is the cruel fact of

death of 41 people and injury caused to more than 100 people in the

incident at Velusamypuram within Karur district.

26. The fact remains that TVK, a regional political party headed by

Thiru Vijay, a famous film actor, applied to the police authorities and

sought permission to organize several public rallies and meetings all

across the State. One such permission was granted by the police

authorities on 26.09.2025. During the rally, the Karur stampede took

place on 27.09.2025. As such, at one hand, the number of deaths and

injuries caused, has stirred public sentiment and shook the

conscience of people across the nation. On the other hand, it is the

ruling dispensation who have control over the immense machinery of

the State, against whom allegations have been brought on affidavit for

not having discharged their functions properly. The allegations have

been made by the relatives of victims and public-spirited persons

seeking transfer of investigation into the matter to the CBI while in the

16 Special Leave Petition filed by the TVK prayer is made to hold an

investigation under supervision of any former Judge of this Court. In

the two writ petitions, referring various documents and materials, CBI

investigation has been prayed. On the first date of hearing and prior to

filing the counter affidavit by Respondents, we must refrain from

making any comments, therefore, those allegations are left for

adjudication on merits at later stage.

27. As per the pleadings and allegations as alleged, primarily it

appears that due to not taking due steps and inaction of the police

personnel the Karur stampede took place, while on the other hand

the State machinery has not accepted those allegations. The top

officials of the Police Department have taken to press conferences to

abjure the fault of the sub-ordinate officials and have taken a robust

defense that their officers were prompt in taking requisite action. In

the said sequel, it cannot be denied that the permission was granted

by the police for holding a political rally by the TVK on a connecting

route to a National Highway while in January, 2025 permission sought

by a different political party was refused.

28. It is said that even after granting such permission, necessary

17 steps for handling the public gathering were not taken. It is urged

before us that if investigation would be carried out by the police

personnel whose top officials have already come out before the media,

making a statement that their sub-ordinate officers have taken

adequate steps and are not at fault, how far such an investigation

would be fair. Prima facie, this fact in itself creates a doubt in the

minds of the general public about the independence and impartiality

of the investigation.

29. In the said situation, caught in the doldrums are the families of

the deceased, injured victims and kith and kin of those who lost their

lives in this tragedy. For them, the political tussle between the two

sides is of little solace. All they are asking is for an unbiased,

independent and impartial investigation in their pursuit of justice.

They have knocked the doors of the High Court as well as of this Court

along with the public – spirited persons, making a prayer for

unbiased, uninfluenced investigation by a central agency.

30. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the parties placed

reliance on various judgments, however, at this stage, we are not

referring all those and appreciating in detail. At the same time, it is

18 required to be seen, when can investigation through CBI, as prayed,

be directed by the High Court or by this Court. In this regard, we can

profitably refer the judgment of this Court in the case of State of W.B.

vs. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights (2010) 3 SCC

517 wherein para 70, this Court observed as thus:

70. Before parting with the case, we deem it necessary to emphasise that despite wide powers conferred by Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution, while passing any order, the Courts must bear in mind certain self-imposed limitations on the exercise of these constitutional powers.

The very plenitude of the power under the said articles requires great caution in its exercise. Insofar as the question of issuing a direction to CBI to conduct investigation in a case is concerned, although no inflexible guidelines can be laid down to decide whether or not such power should be exercised but time and again it has been reiterated that such an order is not to be passed as a matter of routine or merely because a party has levelled some allegations against the local police. This extraordinary power must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instil confidence in investigations or where the incident may have national and international ramifications or where such an order may be necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights. Otherwise CBI would be flooded with a large number of cases and with limited resources, may find it difficult to properly investigate even serious cases and in the process lose its credibility and purpose with unsatisfactory investigations.

31. After perusal it can safely be said that there are no inflexible

guidelines to decide whether or not such power should be exercised.

The CBI investigation ought not to be directed in a routine manner or

where a party has levelled some allegations against local police. Such

19 powers can be exercised cautiously in exceptional situation where it

becomes necessary to provide credibility and instill confidence in

investigation or where the incident may have national and

international ramifications or where such an order may be necessary

for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights. In the

facts of this case, the incident of Karur stampede has definitely left an

imprint in the minds of the citizens throughout the country, wherein

41 persons died in a stampede and more than 100 were injured, it has

wide ramifications in respect of the life of the citizens and in this

context enforcing the fundamental rights of the families who lost their

kith and kin is of utmost importance. Therefore, looking to the

political undertone of the case and the fact that without having regard

to the gravity of the incident, the comments which have been made

before the media by the top officers of the Police Department, may

create doubt in the minds of the citizenry on impartiality and fair

investigation. The faith and trust of the general public on the process

of investigation must be restored in the criminal justice system, and

one way to instill such trust is by ensuring that the investigation in

the present case is completely impartial, independent and unbiased.

32. Looking to the fact that the issue involved certainly has a bearing

20 on the fundamental rights of the citizens and the incident which has

shaken the national conscience, deserves fair and impartial

investigation. As such, by way of interim measure, direction deserves

to be issued to handover the investigation to the CBI which would lead

to fair administration of justice. There cannot be any doubt that fair

investigation is the right of a citizen. Therefore, in view of the

foregoing, the following interim directions are issued:

(i) The investigation with respect to FIR No. 855/2025

registered on 27.09.2025 in the Karur Town PS is

hereby transferred to the CBI.

(ii) The Director, CBI shall forthwith appoint a senior

officer for taking over the investigation and appoint

some other officers for assistance of the said officer.

(iii) The Superintendent of Police and SHO of the Karur

Town PS as well as the SIT set up pursuant to the

order of the learned Single Judge and the Enquiry

Commission set-up by Hon’ble the Chief Minister, shall

immediately hand over the FIR and other relevant

papers, evidence – digital or otherwise collected till now

for further investigation to the officers of the CBI.

21

(iv) In view of transferring the investigation to the CBI, the

direction for appointment of SIT or one-man enquiry

commission shall remain suspended.

(v) State of Tamil Nadu is directed to extend full co-

operation to the officers of the CBI in the investigation

as directed and if necessary, shall provide requisite

logistical support to them.

33. In the facts of the case and the prayer as made, in order to allay

the concerns of all parties, in the pursuit of independence and

impartiality of the investigation, we propose to set up a three-member

Supervisory Committee (the “Committee”) headed by a former Judge

of this Court. We have requested Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi

(Retd.) who has agreed to head the said Committee. We further request

him to choose two Senior Indian Police Service (IPS) officers not below

the rank of Inspector General of Police, who may be of Tamil Nadu

cadre but shall not be a native of Tamil Nadu, as per the choice of the

Hon’ble former Judge. The scope and mandate of the Committee so

formed shall be as follows:

(i) The Committee shall monitor the investigation

transferred to the CBI and is at liberty to issue proper

22 directions for the areas in which the investigation is

required to be carried out;

(ii) It shall monitor the investigation carried out by the

CBI as directed;

(iii) The Committee shall have the liberty to review the

evidence collected by the CBI from time to time and

supervise the investigation to ensure that it reaches its

logical conclusion;

(iv) The Committee may undertake an inquiry into any

matter ancillary / incidental to the Karur stampede

which might be necessary to ensure fair, transparent

and independent investigation into the matter as it

deems fit.

(v) The Committee shall devise its own procedure as per

the directions of the Hon’ble former Judge.

34. Additionally, it is made clear that Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi (Retd.)

may fix emoluments payable to him as well as any incidental expenses

which might arise, including but not limited to perks / facilities,

transportation, logistics, secretarial expenses, which shall be borne by

the State of Tamil Nadu, making all necessary payments. The State of

23 Tamil Nadu shall appoint a senior officer as the ‘Nodal Officer’ to

facilitate the communication between the Committee, the CBI and the

State.

35. In case an order of this Court is necessary at any stage for the

smooth functioning of the Committee or the investigation by the CBI,

liberty is granted to move an application in that regard before this

Court.

36. A soft copy of this order, the record of proceedings and pleadings

of these cases, be transmitted to Hon’ble Justice Ajay Rastogi (Retd.)

and the Director, CBI through the office of the learned Solicitor

General forthwith.

37. Considering the ramifications of the incident and its gravity, we

request the Chairman of the Committee to immediately organize its

first meeting after taking over of the charge of the investigation by the

CBI.

38. The officers of the CBI are directed to submit monthly progress

report of investigation to the Committee which may be placed for

consideration before this Court as and when required. We further

24 request that the investigation may be completed as expeditiously as

possible within the statutory time frame.

39. The W.P. Crl. No. 884/2025 which is pending before the High

Court on the issue of formation of SOP/guidelines for political rallies

shall be assigned by the Chief Justice to the Division Bench for further

hearing.

40. It is clarified that the interim order is passed on the prima facie

opinion, subject to further orders after filing of the counter affidavits.

………………………………,J.

[J.K. MAHESHWARI]

………………………………,J.

[N.V. ANJARIA]

NEW DELHI;

OCTOBER 13, 2025.

25