A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Investigation — Transfer to CBI — Judicial Guidelines
— When permissible — Extraordinary power to be exercised sparingly and in exceptional circumstances.
Held, though there are no inflexible guidelines for directing a CBI investigation, such orders must not be passed as a matter of routine or merely because allegations are made against the local police. Such power can be exercised in exceptional cases where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instill confidence in investigation, or where the incident has national ramifications, or where such an order is essential for enforcing fundamental rights.
Reference: State of W.B. v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, (2010) 3 SCC 571, para 70 — followed.
(Paras 30–32)
B. Criminal Procedure — Fair Investigation — Right of Citizen — Duty of Court
Fair investigation is part of the fundamental right to life and liberty under Art. 21. When impartiality or credibility of investigation is seriously doubted owing to premature public defence by police hierarchy, it becomes necessary to ensure an independent investigation to maintain public confidence in criminal justice system. (Paras 27–32)
C. Constitution of India — Art. 32 & 226 — Exercise of jurisdiction — Self-imposed restraint
High Courts, while exercising writ jurisdiction, must observe judicial discipline and institutional propriety. Entertaining writ petitions beyond the pleadings or without territorial jurisdiction, expanding the scope suo motu without orders of Chief Justice, or passing inconsistent orders vis-à-vis co-ordinate Benches, is impermissible.
(Paras 17–21)
D. High Court Practice and Procedure — Jurisdiction of Benches — Judicial Propriety
Where the cause of action arises within territorial jurisdiction of Madurai Bench, a Single Judge of Principal Seat at Madras had no occasion to entertain a writ petition concerning the same incident (Karur stampede) without orders of the Chief Justice. Multiplicity of proceedings, suo motu enlargement of scope, and creation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) by Single Judge, despite pendency of similar matters before Division Bench, deprecated. (Paras 20–22)
E. Public Interest Litigation — SOPs/Guidelines for Political Rallies — Proper forum
Held, petitions seeking framing of Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for political rallies and crowd management concern the general public and should properly be treated as PILs before Division Bench. Writ Petition (Crl.) filed by a political party for permission to conduct rallies cannot be expanded to such issues by a Single Bench. (Paras 18–19, 24)
F. Administrative Law — Enquiry Commission & SIT — CBI Investigation — Overlap of Powers
Pending CBI investigation, the operation of SIT or State-appointed one-member Enquiry Commission is suspended. Full cooperation by State to CBI and Supervisory Committee directed. (Para 32–33)
G. Human Rights — Right to Justice — Victims of Mass Casualty — Independent probe
In cases involving large-scale loss of life and serious public concern, an independent probe by central agency under judicial supervision is warranted to restore public confidence and ensure justice to victims and their families. (Paras 25–32)
Facts:
Incident of Karur stampede occurred on 27.09.2025 during a political rally organized by Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) in Karur District, Tamil Nadu, leading to 41 deaths and over 100 injuries. FIR No. 855/2025 registered under relevant sections of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992. State Government constituted a one-member Enquiry Commission headed by a retired High Court Judge.
Multiple writ petitions were filed before Madras High Court — some at Madurai Bench seeking transfer of investigation to CBI and formulation of SOPs for political rallies, others before Principal Seat seeking similar reliefs. The Division Bench at Madurai dismissed CBI-transfer petitions, finding no flaw in local police investigation. However, the Single Judge at Principal Seat suo motu constituted a State SIT despite absence of pleadings or parties.
Held:
(Per J.K. Maheshwari & N.V. Anjaria, JJ.)
High Court’s procedural irregularities:
Entertaining writ petitions without territorial jurisdiction and enlarging scope suo motu contrary to coordinate Bench orders reflected lack of judicial propriety and multiplicity of proceedings. (Paras 17–22)
Necessity for independent probe:
Considering premature public statements by senior police officials exonerating subordinates and the political overtones of the tragedy, there existed reasonable apprehension of bias. Therefore, fair investigation by an independent agency was necessary to restore public faith. (Paras 27–32)
Transfer of Investigation:
Investigation of FIR No. 855/2025 relating to Karur stampede transferred to CBI. Director, CBI directed to appoint senior officer to take over investigation; all materials to be handed over by State SIT and Enquiry Commission. (Para 32)
Supervisory Committee:
A Three-Member Supervisory Committee constituted, headed by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi (Retd.), to monitor CBI investigation. Committee to include two senior IPS officers (not native to Tamil Nadu) chosen by the Hon’ble Judge. Scope and powers detailed in para 33. Expenses to be borne by State of Tamil Nadu. (Paras 33–34)
Pending High Court matter:
W.P. (Crl.) No. 884/2025 regarding SOP/guidelines for political rallies to be assigned by Chief Justice of Madras High Court to a Division Bench for further hearing. (Para 39)
Nature of Order:
Interim and prima facie; subject to further consideration upon filing of counter-affidavits. (Para 40)
Final Directions (Para 32–40):
Investigation of FIR No. 855/2025 transferred to CBI.
CBI Director to appoint senior officer with supporting staff.
State SIT and Enquiry Commission to hand over all materials to CBI.
SIT and Enquiry Commission orders kept in abeyance/suspended.
Tamil Nadu Government to cooperate fully and provide logistical support.
Supervisory Committee under Justice Ajay Rastogi (Retd.) constituted to oversee CBI investigation.
Committee to be assisted by two senior IPS officers (non-native Tamil Nadu cadre).
Monthly progress reports to be submitted to Committee; investigation to conclude expeditiously.
Registrar (Judicial) of Madras High Court to furnish explanation to Supreme Court regarding jurisdictional irregularities.
W.P. (Crl.) No. 884/2025 to be placed before Division Bench by order of Chief Justice.
Held that:
Investigation transferred to CBI under supervision of Justice Ajay Rastogi (Retd.) — Orders of SIT and Enquiry Commission suspended — High Court to explain procedural impropriety — Interim directions issued.
2025 INSC 1224 REPORTABLE
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
THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
2
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL) NO(S). 16081 OF 2025
G S MANI PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
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 publicspirited 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
3
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
4
/ 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”).
5
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 onemember 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:
6
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
7
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.
8
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
9
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
10
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.
11
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.
12
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
13
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
14
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
15
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
16
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
17
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
18
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
19
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
20
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
21
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.
22
(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 cooperation 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
23
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
24
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
25
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.
