Karnataka High Court seeks detailed answers from the state government over the stampede tragedy that took eleven lives during the IPL

Karnataka, as well as all cricket lovers and people in the country, are anguished.

As the investigation into the tragic stampede that took place outside Bengaluru’s M. Chinnaswamy Stadium on June 4 gathers momentum, the Karnataka High Court has stepped in, seeking detailed answers from the state government regarding the planning and handling of the incident.

The court’s intervention follows widespread public outcry over the loss of life and growing concerns about administrative and logistical failures.

Acting on its motion, the High Court registered a suo motu writ petition in response to the disturbing incident that resulted in the death of 11 people and left at least 56 others injured.

The petition underscores the judiciary’s proactive stance in holding relevant authorities accountable for potential lapses in public safety and crowd management.

A bench comprising Acting Chief Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice C.M. Joshi has reportedly posed nine crucial questions to the state government.

The court directed that comprehensive written responses be filed by June 10, reflecting the urgency and seriousness with which the matter is being handled.

According to reports by the Press Trust of India (PTI), the bench specifically sought clarification on the following key issues:

1. Authorization of the Event: Who was responsible for officially authorizing the Royal Challengers Bengaluru (RCB) victory celebration event that attracted thousands of fans to the stadium?
2. Decision-Making Process: When exactly was the decision to host the event made, and through what process or chain of command?
3. Permissions and Clearances: Did the event organizers, whether from the cricket franchise, city authorities, or any other stakeholders, secure all the mandatory permissions from civic and law enforcement agencies?
4. Traffic Management: What specific steps were taken to manage vehicular and pedestrian traffic in the vicinity of the stadium, which is located in one of Bengaluru’s busiest areas?
5. Crowd Control Mechanisms: What arrangements, including barricading, entry and exit planning, and deployment of police personnel, were implemented to ensure safe crowd movement?
6. Emergency Response Readiness: Were medical teams, ambulances, and first aid units adequately stationed on-site to deal with any untoward incident?
7. Crowd Estimate and Planning: Was there any prior assessment or estimation made of the expected number of attendees, and were preparations scaled accordingly?
8. On-site Medical Attention: Did the injured receive immediate medical attention at the venue? If not, what were the reasons for the delay?
9. Hospital Transport Timeframe: How much time elapsed between the injuries being reported and the victims being transported to hospitals for treatment?

In addition to these specific questions, the bench also raised a larger concern that has implications for future public events across the state.

The court asked whether a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) currently exists for managing gatherings of over 50,000 people, particularly in the context of large-scale sporting celebrations or similar public functions.

The inquiry into the existence and implementation of such SOPs is expected to become a focal point in determining the adequacy of current crowd management practices.

The stampede unfolded when an overwhelming number of RCB fans gathered at the stadium premises to partake in celebrations following the team’s historic Indian Premier League (IPL) victory — their first-ever title win.

As the crowd surged at multiple access points, the situation quickly spiraled out of control, resulting in a deadly crush.

In the immediate aftermath, the Karnataka state government swiftly took disciplinary action. Following high-level consultations led by Chief Minister Siddaramaiah and attended by senior cabinet ministers, Legal Advisor A.S. Ponnana, and Advocate General K.M. Shashikiran Shetty, the government announced the suspension of five senior police officers.

Notably, this included Bengaluru City Police Commissioner B. Dayananda, reflecting the gravity of the administrative response.

Political and official sources suggest that the High Court’s intense scrutiny and pointed questions may have significantly influenced the government’s decision to suspend the top police brass.

The suspensions appear to be part of a broader effort to demonstrate accountability and regain public trust in the wake of the tragedy.

As the state government prepares its formal response to the High Court by the June 10 deadline, the outcome of this case is likely to have far-reaching consequences, not only for those directly involved but also for how public events are organized and regulated in the future across Karnataka.