The Supreme Court of India declined to entertain a plea that sought urgent directions to government authorities regarding improved crowd management measures, particularly in response to a recent stampede at the New Delhi Railway Station. The petitioner claimed that over 200 people had lost their lives in the tragic incident, which allegedly resulted from an unprecedented surge of passengers at the railway terminal.
A bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and P.K. Mishra presided over the matter and questioned the petitioner’s counsel regarding the veracity of the claims made in the plea. “Is there any proof that 200 have died?” the bench inquired, expressing skepticism over the figures presented.
The counsel representing the petitioner asserted that multiple videos depicting the stampede had been uploaded on social media platform X (formerly Twitter), substantiating the severity of the situation. Furthermore, the counsel stated that the Railways had issued notices to individuals who were present at the scene as witnesses to the tragic event.
However, the Supreme Court bench remained unconvinced by the petitioner’s arguments, responding, “Those persons can approach the court.” The judges suggested that affected individuals or direct witnesses to the incident had the legal right to file complaints and seek remedies through the judicial system if they believed there was negligence in handling the situation.
During the hearing, the bench sought clarification on whether the petitioner genuinely believed that the authorities had neglected their duty in managing the crowd at the railway station. The counsel argued that the petition was filed with the broader objective of ensuring the proper implementation of the National Disaster Management Act and other relevant regulations about crowd control and public safety at major transportation hubs.
Despite the arguments put forth, the Supreme Court chose to dismiss the petition, stating that the petitioner was free to approach the Delhi High Court with their concerns. The bench maintained that the high court would be the more appropriate forum for addressing grievances related to the alleged shortcomings in crowd management at railway stations.
The counsel further pointed out that the plea had named all Indian states and Union Territories as party respondents in the matter, underscoring the nationwide significance of crowd management and public safety regulations. However, this did not influence the Supreme Court’s decision to dismiss the plea.
Meanwhile, a separate case related to the same stampede incident is already under consideration by the Delhi High Court. On February 19, the Delhi High Court took cognizance of a public interest litigation (PIL) regarding the recent stampede at the New Delhi Railway Station. In response to the PIL, the high court directed the Railways to evaluate and address key issues, such as the fixation of a maximum permissible number of passengers at railway platforms and the regulation of platform ticket sales.
The Delhi High Court also instructed the concerned authorities to provide detailed information regarding the steps taken on these matters by submitting an affidavit outlining their decisions and planned measures to prevent similar tragedies in the future.
The tragic stampede at the New Delhi Railway Station occurred on February 15, reportedly resulting in the deaths of at least 18 individuals. The incident was triggered by an overwhelming surge of passengers attempting to board trains bound for Prayagraj, where the grand religious gathering of Maha Kumbh was underway. The influx of devotees and pilgrims traveling to attend the event put an extraordinary strain on the railway infrastructure, leading to chaotic and unsafe conditions.
As legal proceedings and investigations continue, the issue of crowd management at railway stations remains a significant concern, particularly during major religious gatherings and festivals that draw millions of people. Authorities are expected to take necessary measures to improve crowd control strategies and prevent such unfortunate incidents in the future.