During a hearing on the Karur stampede tragedy case, the Supreme Court on Friday (December 12) declared that there is "something wrong" with the Madras High Court after scrutinising a confidential report submitted by the Registrar General of the High Court.
The extraordinary observation came during the hearing on the tragic Karur stampede, a rally that went fatally awry and led to the death of 41 people in September.
Earlier, the apex court had refused to back down from its mandate for a CBI-led probe, while grilling the state and its high court on procedural lapses and possible biases.
The SC bench of Justices JK Maheshwari and Aravind Kumar refused to modify its October 13 judgment mandating a CBI investigation and the composition of the supervisory committee with non-native Tamil Nadu IPS officers, and dismissed the state's plea. The state had pleaded that such requirements undermine federal autonomy and set a dangerous precedent.
In its interim order passed on October 13 for a CBI probe, the SC had sought a report from the Registral General of the Madras high court explaining how they dealt with the case.
The Karur stampede unfolded on September 27, amid a massive political rally organised by Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK), the party led by popular Tamil actor-turned-politician Vijay.
Thousands of supporters, many from rural Tamil Nadu, surged toward a narrow 300-meter passage in Karur town to catch a glimpse of their idol. Overcrowding, poor crowd management, and alleged negligence by party cadres led to a deadly crush, leaving 41 dead including women and children and scores injured.
Who is responsible?
The TVK accused the TN government of failing to provide adequate security, while the ruling DMK administration pointed fingers squarely at the organisers.
The handling of the aftermath was questioned as post-mortems on 30-40 bodies were conducted at midnight and cremations were quickly completed by 4 am. All of which, only fuelled suspicions that there has been a 'cover-up'.
Karur stampede tragedy: Here is a dateline of the legal battle:
Legal battle dateline
September 27: The stampede at TVK rally claims 41 lives in Karur, prompting public outrage and demands for accountability.
October 3: The Madras high court's Chennai Principal Bench, in a surprising jurisdictional overreach (as Karur falls under the Madurai Bench), orders the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) comprising only Tamil Nadu state police officers.
In the same ruling ironically, on a petition seeking a Standard Operating Protocol (SOP) for political rallies, the court levels adverse remarks against TVK and Vijay without hearing their side. Separately, the Madurai Bench rejects a plea to transfer the probe to the CBI, opting instead for an SOP for public meetings.
October 13: The SC steps in with an interim order, mandating a CBI investigation due to "political undertones" and doubts over state police impartiality, especially after top officers' media briefings painted TVK as the sole villain.
The court forms a three-member Supervisory Committee, led by former apex judge Justice Ajay Rastogi, to oversee the probe. Crucially, it stipulates that the two senior IPS officers assisting him must be from the Tamil Nadu cadre but "not natives of Tamil Nadu" to ensure neutrality – a clause the state sought to scrap today, unsuccessfully.
The bench had also demanded a report from the Madras high court's Registrar General to explain the unusual interventions by the Chennai bench.
December 12: In a packed hearing, the court pores over the Registrar General's report and doesn't mince words. "Something wrong going in High Court. This is not a right thing that is happening in HC," Justice Maheshwari remarked, directing that the report be shared with all parties for responses.
'Wrong practice', says SC
The court's ire wasn't limited to procedure. It questioned why TVK's rally was greenlit in the cramped venue when rival party AIADMK had been denied permission there just days earlier for the same reason.
"How can the Chennai Bench direct an SIT when the matter was under Madurai's jurisdiction?" the bench probed, calling the high court's actions a procedural "wrong practice".
Senior advocate P Wilson, representing the TN government, defended the high court's flexibility, "Orders are passed on whatever is incidental to the issue" only for Justice Maheshwari to retort, "If some practice is wrong..."
TVK, through its general secretary Aadhav Arjuna's petition, had challenged the state-only SIT as biased, demanding independent oversight. The SC agreed, staying the state-appointed Justice Aruna Jagadeesan Commission's probe (with assurances it won't meddle in CBI work) and issuing notices on a fresh plea by petitioner KK Ramesh.
The state, meanwhile, doubled down in its counter-affidavit, blaming Vijay's "unruly cadres" for the chaos.
