Karnataka High Court.
Credit: DH File Photo
Bengaluru: The state government on Thursday took an undertaking before the Karnataka High Court that it will keep in the custody of the Chief Secretary all the correspondence/communication, including offline and online, pertaining to the felicitation of the Royal Challengers Bangalore (RCB) cricket team and the stampede at the M Chinnaswamy Stadium.
Advocate General (AG) Shashikiran Shetty made this submission after the division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice V Kameshwar Rao and C M Joshi asked whether any order has been passed to keep all documents in safe custody.
The bench was hearing the suo motu PIL registered by the high court in connection with the stampede incident that killed 11 on June 4, 2025.
“We take on record the submissions made by the Advocate General that all the original correspondence/communication, inter departmental, both offline and online, of all the stakeholders concerning the event (celebrations and felicitation) on June 4, 2025 shall be kept in the custody of the Chief Secretary,” the bench said in the order, while adjourning the matter to June 17 for further consideration.
On June 5, 2025, the division bench had taken cognizance of the stampede incident and had directed the state government to submit a report as to who took the decision to hold the victory celebration and in what manner. In the subsequent hearing, the bench had permitted the AG to submit the report in a sealed cover.
At the hearing on Thursday, the AG submitted before the court the status report in a sealed cover. He said that the state government has to the extent possible has answered all the queries raised by the court. He further said that the report deals with the aspects such as reasons for the stampede as well as measures to be taken in future. Meanwhile, advocates seeking to intervene through interlocutory applications (IA) requested the court to keep the status report in public domain. The bench said it will consider all IAs in the next date of hearing while directing the parties to provide the copies to the AG.
Why set up multiple enquiries?
During the hearing, the bench posed certain queries to the state government as to why multiple enquiries were set up; one a magisterial inquiry by the Deputy Commissioner and the one-man commission of inquiry under Justice John Michael Cunha, a retired judge of the Karnataka high court. The bench further asked the AG to furnish the terms of reference of both the enquiries. The court wondered as to what the state would do if both the enquiries came up with disparate findings.
“We will not spare you (government) if the findings are different by different commissions," Justice CM Joshi orally said, observing that confusion should not prevail over multiple enquiry commissions.
To this, the AG said that the terms of reference are distinctive to both the inquiries. The AG also said that he will submit all the documents, including the terms of reference, by the next date of hearing and also place the translated copies of some of the documents filed in the status report.