Madras High Court Rejects Pleas Seeking CBI Probe Into Karur Stampede, Govt Says No Permission For Any Political Meets Till SOP Framed
The Madras High Court (Madurai bench) on Friday (October 3) rejected a bunch of pleas seeking CBI probe into the Karur stampede which occurred on last Saturday, claiming 39 lives.
Meanwhile, the State government also informed the high court that until SOPs are framed for holding of public meetings by political parties, no permissions will be given to any political party to hold such meetings.
A division bench of Justice M. Dhandapani and Justice M Jothiraman also disposed of PILs seeking framing of SOPs, noting that the principal bench has already asked the State Government to frame SOP. Petitioners have been given liberty to file impleading petition in that plea.
Meanwhile AAG J Ravindran appearing for the State informed the Court that the State Government will not grant permissions to any party for public meetings in any-non designated places till framing of SOPs.
Recording this submission the bench said, "This will not affect public gatherings by parties in designated places".
However, the Court asked political parties to ensure proper drinking water facilities, toilets and parking areas are available.
The high court also issued notice on a plea seeking additional compensation for the victims affected in the stampede and asked state government to file its response.
The bench also took up a petition filed by Desiya Makkal Sakthi Katchi seeking CBI probe into the stampede incident and said that the petitioner is not affected by the tragedy and questioned the need to transfer the investigation at the initial stage. It dismissed the plea plea saying that petitioner is only a politician and not an affected party, and noted that the investigation is in nascent stage.
The court further took up another petition seeking CBI probe into the incident. It dismissed the plea saying that it is not maintainable.
Case title: SENTHILKANNAN v/s THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE With Related Petitions
Case No: WP(MD)/27532/2025 (PIL), WP(MD)/27540/2025 (PIL), WP(MD)/27541/2025 (PIL), WP(MD)/27554/2025 (PIL), WP(MD)/27556/2025 (PIL), WP(MD)/27563/2025 (PIL), WP(MD)/27571/2025 (PIL)