<p>Bengaluru: The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/karnataka-high-court">High Court of Karnataka</a> has ordered the state government to disclose its status report on the stadium <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/stampede">stampede</a>, observing that no national security or public interest was involved in keeping the documents in a sealed cover. </p><p>A division bench of acting Chief Justice V Kameshwar Rao and C M Joshi passed a detailed order on the issue as to whether the June 12, 2025, status report should be shared with other respondents. </p><p>The court registered a suo motu PIL petition on June 5, a day after the stampede at the M Chinnaswamy Stadium left 11 people dead. </p><p>The bench ordered that the report, along with translations submitted by the state government, should be included in court records and shared with other respondents — the Karnataka State Cricket Association (KSCA), IPL team RCB and DNA Entertainment Private Limited. </p><p>The bench dismissed Advocate General Shashikiran Shetty's request to keep the status report in a sealed cover. </p>.Bengaluru-based couple stunned after eye doctor relates myopia to marriage and children.<p>The bench noted that the arguments placed by the AG were "insufficient", as sealed-cover proceedings are limited to cases involving public interest, national security or privacy rights. He had argued that disclosing the status report may "influence" the magisterial inquiry/judicial commission. </p><p>"Even on facts we find that, those parameters are not met inasmuch, it is not a case of national security or privacy rights. Even public interest shall not come into play for more than one reason; firstly, no such plea is advanced; secondly, the ground to await the report of magisterial inquiry or judicial commission has no public interest angle. That apart, even the ground that the magisterial inquiry/judicial commission may get influenced by the stand/facts urged by the state in the status report is unmerited in as much as such a plea has no public interest angle and surely a retired high court judge and an All India Service officer who are heading the judicial commission/magisterial inquiry cannot be susceptible to influences emanating from the status report of respondent No.1 (state),” the bench said. </p><p>The bench further said: "That apart, these proceedings have been initiated suo motu by this court to know the reasons led to the tragedy; whether it could have been prevented and what measures to be taken to prevent such tragedies in future. The finding on those issues has to be on factual foundation. Moreover, we are of the view that, if the sealed cover is opened and the report is shared with the respondents, they can assist the court to understand the facts in a better perspective including the reasons which led to the incident and also it could have been prevented."</p>
<p>Bengaluru: The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/karnataka-high-court">High Court of Karnataka</a> has ordered the state government to disclose its status report on the stadium <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/stampede">stampede</a>, observing that no national security or public interest was involved in keeping the documents in a sealed cover. </p><p>A division bench of acting Chief Justice V Kameshwar Rao and C M Joshi passed a detailed order on the issue as to whether the June 12, 2025, status report should be shared with other respondents. </p><p>The court registered a suo motu PIL petition on June 5, a day after the stampede at the M Chinnaswamy Stadium left 11 people dead. </p><p>The bench ordered that the report, along with translations submitted by the state government, should be included in court records and shared with other respondents — the Karnataka State Cricket Association (KSCA), IPL team RCB and DNA Entertainment Private Limited. </p><p>The bench dismissed Advocate General Shashikiran Shetty's request to keep the status report in a sealed cover. </p>.Bengaluru-based couple stunned after eye doctor relates myopia to marriage and children.<p>The bench noted that the arguments placed by the AG were "insufficient", as sealed-cover proceedings are limited to cases involving public interest, national security or privacy rights. He had argued that disclosing the status report may "influence" the magisterial inquiry/judicial commission. </p><p>"Even on facts we find that, those parameters are not met inasmuch, it is not a case of national security or privacy rights. Even public interest shall not come into play for more than one reason; firstly, no such plea is advanced; secondly, the ground to await the report of magisterial inquiry or judicial commission has no public interest angle. That apart, even the ground that the magisterial inquiry/judicial commission may get influenced by the stand/facts urged by the state in the status report is unmerited in as much as such a plea has no public interest angle and surely a retired high court judge and an All India Service officer who are heading the judicial commission/magisterial inquiry cannot be susceptible to influences emanating from the status report of respondent No.1 (state),” the bench said. </p><p>The bench further said: "That apart, these proceedings have been initiated suo motu by this court to know the reasons led to the tragedy; whether it could have been prevented and what measures to be taken to prevent such tragedies in future. The finding on those issues has to be on factual foundation. Moreover, we are of the view that, if the sealed cover is opened and the report is shared with the respondents, they can assist the court to understand the facts in a better perspective including the reasons which led to the incident and also it could have been prevented."</p>