Bengaluru Stampede: CAT Quashes Suspension Of IPS Officer Vikash Kumar Vikash, Says Prima Facie RCB Responsible For Mishap

The bench consisting of Judicial Member Justice B K Shrivastava and Member Santosh Mehra observed that the Police did not get time to make arrangements for crowd management since RCB "suddenly posted" about the event on social media platforms, without seeking prior permission.

"Prima facie it appears that the RCB is responsible for the gathering of about three to five lakh people...It cannot expected from the Police that within a short time of about 12 hours the Police will make all arrangements required in the Police Act or in the other rules, etc. Police personnel are also human beings. They are neither “God”(Bhagwan) nor Magician and also not having the magic powers like “Alladdin ka Chirag” which was able to fulfil any wish only by rubbing a finger . To control the aforesaid type of gathering and for making the proper arrangements sufficient time should be given to the Police," the bench remarked.

It thus ordered the State to re-instate Vikash immediately, treating the period of suspension as on duty with full pay and allowances.

By the order dated 05.06.2025 other officers who were suspended included IPS officer B. Dayananda (Additional Director General & Commissioner of Police, Bengaluru City, Bengaluru), IPS officer Shekar H Tekkannavar (Deputy Commissioner of Police, Central Division, Bengaluru City), C. Balakrishna (Assistant Commissioner of Police, Cubbon Park, Bengaluru) and A.K. Girish (Police Inspector, Cubbon Park Police Station, Bengaluru) was also suspended.

The bench said “We expect from the Government that the Government will give the same benefit to the other officers who were suspended by the same order Annexure – A3.”

The applicant contended that the suspension order is liable to be quashed because there was no fault of the applicant. There was a lack of time to prepare for the huge event. The suspension order has been issued without issuing a show cause notice or without granting any opportunity for showing the defence. Suspension is an extreme measure and should only be imposed in case of grave misconduct, corruption, criminal negligence, etc.

Further, the suspension order is a cyclostyled and mechanical order issued without independent evaluation of the applicant's role. The magisterial inquiry is still pending, while the applicant has been suspended without any primary findings. Therefore, the aforesaid order is liable to be quashed.

The respondents opposed the application submitting that Karnataka Police Manual describes the duties and responsibilities of police. The primary duty of the Police is to prevent crime but considering the events leading to the tragedy prima facie suggests lack of policing on the part of the Jurisdictional Bengaluru City Police which led to the unfortunate incident at the Chinnaswamy Stadium on 04.06.2025. Prima facie it appears that the applicant and other officers failed to maintain law and order.

Findings:

The bench referred to the impugned order which mentioned that “pending enquiry it is found that there has been a substantial dereliction of duty”. “What is the base of this sentence?, is not clear.”, it said.

It also said it is mentioned in the order that the CEO of RCB had intimated the Commissioner of Police, Bengaluru City on 03.06.2025 about holding the victory parade and celebration on 04.06.2025. The aforesaid portion of the order is not correct because the respondents did not submit the copy of any intimation submitted to the Commissioner of Police, Bengaluru on 03.06.2025.

Referring to the letter issued by the Karnataka State Cricket Association dated June 3, informing the inspector of Cubbon Park police station about the victory parade. The bench said “The letter was submitted to the Inspector of Police, Cubbon Park Police Station, Bengaluru. Any copy of this letter was not given to any superior officer. It is not shown that the copy was also given to the present applicant Shri Vikash Kumar Vikash or other officers, Shri B. Dayananda or Shri Shekar H Tekkannavar.”

Stating that the permission for procession and assembly should be taken from the Additional Commissioner of Police and law and order as per the “Licensing and Controlling of Assemblies and Public Procession (Bengaluru City) Order, 2009.

It said, “Upon basis of this letter, prima facie the police was not bound to give any facilities or to provide any support. In spite of that the Police provided the proper arrangements as far as possible.”

Emphasising that the government has ordered a magisterial inquiry and one man inquiry commission, to ascertain who was responsible for the stampede. It said “The Government was not in the position to ascertain the fact that which person or which officers were responsible for the aforesaid stampede.”

The bench referred to the tweets made by RCB announcing the victory parade and said “Prima facie it appears that the RCB is responsible for the gathering of about three to five lakh people. The RCB did not take the appropriate permission or consent from the Police. Suddenly, they posted on social media platforms and as a result of aforesaid information the public were gathered. Because of a shortage of time on 04.06.2026, the Police were unable to do the appropriate arrangements. Sufficient time was not given to the Police.”

Following which it held “Prima facie, it appears that, at the time of passing the impugned order of suspension, any material was not available for showing the “substantial dereliction of duty”. There was no any material for showing the fact that the Police was having sufficient time to make all the arrangements. No permission was granted by the Police because the concerned organizer did not apply for the permission as per Rules. As per terms of inquiry, it is yet to be ascertained who was the responsible person for the lapses and deficiencies.”

It added “In the aforesaid all circumstances, in view of this Tribunal the order Annexure – A3 has been passed in a mechanical manner and the order is not based upon the convincing materials. The Police officers have been suspended without any sufficient material or grounds. Hence, the aforesaid order is liable to be quashed.”

Appearance: Senior Counsel Dhyan Chinnappa for Adv. Dhanush Menon and Adv. Akshay Ramachandra Huddar for Applicant.

AAG Reuben Jacob, a/w Advocate Shri M. Rajakumar for Respondent.