7 months ago
2
On October 13, the Supreme Court abruptly applied the brakes connected a fledgling probe of a Madras High Court-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) and a State-constituted Enquiry Commission headed by Justice (retired) Aruna Jagadeesan into the Karur stampede (on September 27, 41 radical were killed during a stampede astatine a governmental rally hosted by actor-cum-politician Vijay successful Karur district, Tamil Nadu).
Both the SIT and Justice Jagadeesan were directed to instantly manus implicit papers and grounds to the officers of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The apical court’s determination to displacement the Karur stampede probe to the CBI was powered by 2 “sweeping” factors — the “political undertones” of the lawsuit and a cognition that top-ranking Tamil Nadu Police officers made comments successful a property league to the grade that their subordinates were not astatine fault. The Bench of Justices J.K. Maheshwari and N.V. Anjaria concluded that the behaviour of the State’s elder constabulary officers “may make uncertainty successful the minds of the citizenry astir the impartiality and fairness of the investigation”, necessitating its transportation to the CBI.
The CBI is simply a cardinal bureau governed by the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 which traces its origins to the Special Police Establishment (SPE) formed successful 1941 to weed retired corruption successful war-time procurements. Once coined by the Supreme Court arsenic a “caged parrot” of the Centre, the CBI is considered a premier investigative assemblage which probes a wide scope of crimes with inter-State and nationalist ramifications.
However, the apical court’s reasoning, wholly based connected petitioners’ pleadings and “sweeping remarks” unaccompanied by prima facie evidence to amusement the SIT probe was riddled by bias, are simply not capable to displacement a lawsuit to the CBI without the explicit consent of the State government. While it is well-settled that a law tribunal tin bid a CBI probe arsenic judicial reappraisal is portion of the Basic Structure, the court, beryllium it the Supreme Court oregon a State High Court, indispensable not nonstop a CBI enquiry successful a “routine manner”. A judicial bid of transportation of a probe to the CBI is lone the ‘last resort’.
‘Measure of past resort’
The Supreme Court has a well-developed jurisprudence, evolved done judgments, which imposes important self-restraint connected the workout of the bonzer law powerfulness to bid a CBI probe nether Article 32 (for the Supreme Court) oregon Article 226 (High Court) of the Constitution. The apical tribunal has held that the workout of inherent powers to nonstop the CBI to analyse indispensable beryllium exercised “sparingly, cautiously, and lone successful exceptional situations”. The tribunal has consistently cautioned that a CBI probe should not beryllium directed “merely due to the fact that a enactment casts definite aspersions oregon harbours a subjective deficiency of assurance successful the State Police”.
“It goes without saying that for invoking this power, the tribunal acrophobic indispensable beryllium satisfied that the worldly placed prima facie discloses committee of offences and necessitates a CBI probe to guarantee the cardinal close to a just and impartial investigation, oregon wherever the complexity, scale, oregon nationalist ramification of specified allegations demands expertise of cardinal agency,” the tribunal has explained.
Judicial precedents person underscored that an bid directing an probe to beryllium carried retired by CBI should beryllium treated arsenic a “measure of past resort”, justified lone erstwhile the law tribunal is convinced that the integrity of the process has been compromised oregon has reasons to judge that it whitethorn get compromised to a grade that shakes the conscience of courts oregon nationalist religion successful the justness transportation system.
Such circumstances compelling the judicial transportation of an probe to the CBI from the State Police whitethorn typically originate erstwhile the materials placed connected grounds earlier a tribunal prima facie point towards systemic failure, the engagement of high-ranking State officials oregon politically influential persons, oregon erstwhile the section police’s behaviour itself creates a tenable uncertainty successful the minds of the citizenry regarding their quality to behaviour a neutral probe.
In the lack of these factors, law courts indispensable debar placing unnecessary burdens connected a specialised bureau with “matters that bash not fulfill the threshold of an exceptional case”.
The crushed for the displacement
The 25-page bid of the Supreme Court shifting the Karur stampede probe to the CBI shows that the determination was mostly made connected the ground of “allegations” raised by the petitioners, who person been identified arsenic relatives of victims and public-spirited persons.
The tribunal noted that the calamity which claimed 41 lives and near implicit a 100 injured astatine a rally organised by Vijay, laminitis of the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK), astatine Velusamypuram successful Karur District had “stirred nationalist sentiment and shook the conscience of radical crossed the nation”. The tribunal said that petitioners person made “allegations” that the ruling dispensation, which has “control implicit the immense machinery of the State”, did not discharge its functions “properly”. The Bench, successful this context, referred to averment successful the petitions that apical constabulary officers, held a property league during which they “robustly” defended their colleagues, raising the apprehension that the probe by the SIT comprising Tamil Nadu Police officers would not beryllium held fairly. It recorded submissions successful the petitions that the constabulary had denied support earlier, successful January, to different governmental enactment to behaviour a rally astatine the aforesaid spot wherever the calamity occurred during the TVK event. The tribunal voiced this vague conception to hint astatine “political undertones” astatine play.
These factors led to the tribunal to prima facie conclude that determination was “a uncertainty successful the minds of the wide nationalist astir the independency and impartiality of the investigation” and victims should beryllium spared of being caught successful the “political tussle betwixt 2 sides”.
Previous judgments
A cursory work of the bid shows that the determination to displacement the probe to the CBI was wholly based connected the allegations levelled by the petitioners. The Supreme Court judgement successful Secretary, Minor Irrigation & Rural Engg. Services UP has observed that the powerfulness of a tribunal to displacement an probe to the CBI “can beryllium exercised lone successful cases wherever determination is capable worldly to travel to a prima facie conclusion that determination is simply a request for specified inquiry. It is not capable to person specified worldly successful the pleadings”.
Secondly, the Supreme Court did not specify a azygous lawsuit of bias oregon hold by the Tamil Nadu Police’s SIT. In a Constitution Bench judgement successful State of West Bengal versus Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, the apical tribunal had held that the bonzer powerfulness to transportation probes to CBI “cannot and should not beryllium exercised successful a regular mode without examining the complexities, quality of offence and sometimes the tardy advancement successful the investigations involving precocious officials of the State investigating bureau itself”.
In an October 16, 2025 bid authored by Justice Maheshwari himself successful the lawsuit of Legislative Council UP versus Sushil Kumar, the justice noted that nationalist bid (Entry 1) and the constabulary (Entry 2) was a State taxable falling successful List II of Schedule VII of the Constitution. “It is simply a superior work of the investigating bureau of the State Police to analyse each offences which are committed wrong its jurisdiction. The investigations tin beryllium entrusted to the CBI lone successful exceptional circumstances,” Justice Maheshwari had written. In K.V. Rajendran versus Superintendent of Police, CBCID, the apical tribunal had held that a transportation of a lawsuit to CBI could lone beryllium justified by showing capable worldly to beryllium that the State probe was dishonest oregon malafide.
Thirdly, ambiguous inferences astir “political undertones”, “political tussles betwixt 2 sides” and reported comments made by constabulary officers successful a property conscionable cannot beryllium grounds for making incursions into a State’s powerfulness to analyse crimes wrong its ain jurisdiction, particularly erstwhile Tamil Nadu had withdrawn its wide consent to CBI probe successful 2023. The Supreme Court has further constituted a committee headed by erstwhile apical tribunal judge, Justice Ajay Rastogi, to oversee the CBI probe. Such an statement does not person immoderate statutory backing.
Besides, the SIT was formed separately by the Madras High Court successful the Karur stampede case. The Justice Jagadeesan Commission of Enquiry was constituted connected the precise nighttime of the tragedy. There had been nary allegation of circumstantial bias levelled against the SIT oregon the Enquiry Commission, warranting a alteration of the probe agency. The Madras High Court had besides antecedently refused a circumstantial request for transportation to the CBI. In the Shree Shree Ram Janki Asthan Tapovan Mandir judgment, the apical tribunal had held that it was not for the judiciary to marque sweeping remarks astir the State authorities and its functionaries and taxable them to CBI probe simply based connected allegations brought earlier it. The tribunal said the judiciary has to recognize that the “functioning successful the authorities is by antithetic officers and the moving of the Executive has in-built checks and balances”.
