TVK Chief Vijay Summoned by CBI in Karur Stampede Case: Legal and Constitutional Dimensions

Background of the Karur Stampede Tragedy

On September 27, 2025, a tragic stampede occurred during a political rally organised by Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) chief and actor-turned-politician Vijay in Karur district, Tamil Nadu. The incident resulted in the death of at least 41 people and left over 60 injured, many of them women and children who had travelled from different parts of the state to attend the rally.

The rally was scheduled to begin at 3:00 pm, but Vijay reportedly arrived only at 7:30 pm, leading to prolonged waiting periods, swelling crowds, and severe mismanagement at the venue.


CBI Summons and Vijay’s Appearance in Delhi

Months after the incident, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) summoned Vijay for questioning in connection with the stampede probe. He is scheduled to appear before the agency at its Delhi headquarters, having flown from Chennai earlier in the day.

According to PTI, TVK has formally requested the Delhi Police to provide security during Vijay’s appearance, highlighting the political sensitivity and public attention surrounding the case.

The CBI had earlier questioned TVK office bearers and event organisers, and Vijay’s summoning marks a significant escalation in the investigation.


Allegations of Organisational Negligence

Tamil Nadu Police, during preliminary inquiries, pointed to serious lapses in crowd management, including:

  • Organisers sought permission anticipating 10,000 attendees, but nearly 27,000 people gathered.

  • Crowd accumulation began as early as 11:00 am, despite the event being scheduled for later in the afternoon.

  • There was inadequate provision of food, drinking water, and medical facilities.

  • Vijay’s delayed arrival significantly worsened crowd congestion and unrest.

The then DGP (in-charge) G. Venkatraman stated that earlier TVK rallies had witnessed much smaller crowds, and the organisers failed to reassess risk despite growing public interest.


Madras High Court’s Observations

The Madras High Court, while hearing petitions related to the incident, strongly criticised the organisers and termed the stampede a “huge man-made disaster.”

The Court emphasised that:

  • Such incidents are foreseeable and preventable

  • Political rallies impose a heightened duty of care on organisers

  • Failure to anticipate crowd behaviour can attract criminal and civil liability

The Court’s remarks laid the groundwork for a deeper probe into accountability beyond ground-level organisers.


Applicable Statutes and Legal Provisions

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023

The investigation may involve the following provisions:

  • Section 105 BNS (Culpable homicide not amounting to murder) — if deaths resulted from gross negligence

  • Section 292 BNS (Negligent conduct with respect to public safety)

  • Section 125 BNS (Acts endangering life or personal safety of others)

These provisions criminalise reckless conduct leading to loss of life, even in the absence of intent.


Disaster Management Act, 2005

If invoked, authorities may examine:

  • Section 51 — punishment for obstruction or non-compliance with safety directions

  • Section 54 — punishment for making false claims (including under-reporting expected crowd size)

Large public gatherings fall within the scope of disaster preparedness and risk mitigation obligations.


Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

  • Section 160 CrPC empowers investigating agencies to summon any person acquainted with facts of the case

  • Vijay’s appearance before the CBI falls squarely within this procedural framework


Constitutional Provisions Involved

Article 21 – Right to Life

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that Article 21 includes the right to safety and protection from avoidable hazards. Failure of organisers and authorities to ensure basic safety at public events may amount to a constitutional violation.

Article 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b)

While political rallies are protected under:

  • Freedom of speech

  • Right to assemble peacefully

These rights are subject to reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order and safety under Article 19(2) and 19(3).


Judicial Precedents on Stampede and Public Safety

Uphaar Cinema Tragedy Case (2004)

The Supreme Court held organisers and authorities accountable for negligence leading to loss of life, reinforcing that commercial or public events carry non-delegable safety duties.

Ratlam Municipal Council v. Vardhichand (1980)

The Court ruled that administrative inconvenience cannot justify failure to protect public safety.

Destruction of Public and Private Properties v. State of A.P. (2009)

The Supreme Court emphasised strict liability for organisers of mass gatherings when violence or loss occurs due to inadequate planning.

These precedents underscore that crowd mismanagement is not a mere administrative lapse but a serious legal failure.


Why Vijay’s Questioning Matters

Vijay’s summoning raises critical questions:

  • Can political leaders be held personally accountable for organisational failures?

  • Does delayed arrival contribute to causal negligence?

  • Where does responsibility lie when popularity exceeds planning?

The CBI’s probe may set an important precedent for political accountability in mass gatherings, especially as election campaigns become larger and more spectacle-driven.


Conclusion

The Karur stampede stands as a grim reminder of how administrative negligence, poor planning, and leadership lapses can turn political enthusiasm into tragedy. Vijay’s appearance before the CBI marks a crucial phase in determining individual and institutional responsibility.

As courts and investigative agencies tighten scrutiny over public events, this case could redefine standards of care for political rallies across India.

The outcome will be closely watched—not just in Tamil Nadu, but nationally.

Comments

Popular posts

Father of RG Kar Victim Loses Faith in Legal System Amid Allegations of CBI Inconsistencies

Bill Gates Applauds India's 'Namo Drone Didi' Program: A Game-Changer in Rural Empowerment and Agri-Tech

Encroachment on Public Land: A Growing Threat to Governance and Public Welfare

Flight Operations Disrupted Amid India-Pakistan Tensions: Air India and IndiGo Cancel Multiple Flights on May 13, 2025

Equality Before Law

Rights of a Arrested Person in India

Your Complete Online Guide to Land Records and Services in Bihar

Evolution of Constitution under Article 14 to 18

Supreme Court Advocates for Childcare and Feeding Rooms in Public Spaces

Supreme Court Allows Collection of Voice Samples from Witnesses — Not Just Accused Persons