The Supreme Court (SC) on Friday, October 10, 2025, raised concerns regarding conflicting orders issued by the Madras High Court concerning the Karur stampede that occurred on September 27, 2025. A bench of Justices J K Maheshwari and N V Anjaria questioned the propriety of a single judge of the Madras High Court's principal bench in Chennai for ordering a probe by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) into the Karur stampede, especially when the petition it was responding to was regarding the framing of a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for political rallies. The incident, which took place during a political rally organized by actor Vijay's Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) in Karur, resulted in the death of 41 people and injuries to over 60.
The Supreme Court also questioned how the principal bench in Chennai entertained the petition related to the Karur incident, considering that Karur falls under the jurisdiction of the Madurai bench. Furthermore, the court noted that a division bench of the high court in Madurai was already examining the issue. Justice Maheshwari questioned the necessity of the single judge ordering an SIT probe when the division bench had already taken cognizance of the matter and refused a prayer for a CBI probe. The court also pointed out that the two orders were passed on the same day, emphasizing the need for propriety within the system.
The Supreme Court also raised concerns about Tamil Nadu granting permission to TVK to hold the rally in Karur, while allegedly denying permission to AIADMK for a similar event. Additionally, the apex court questioned the Tamil Nadu government regarding the postmortem procedures conducted on the stampede victims, specifically how the postmortems of 41 individuals were completed within four hours during the night. The state government has been directed to respond to the court's queries.
Representing TVK, Senior Advocate Gopal Subramanium argued that the petition before the High Court was solely for framing an SOP for political rallies, but the SIT was formed on the first day of the hearing itself. He also contended that many adverse observations were made against Vijay, which were factually incorrect. Subramanium stated that while the state police forced the actor to leave the spot, the High Court wrongly stated that he absconded and abandoned his fans. TVK expressed apprehension that the SIT, composed of state officials, would not conduct a fair probe and requested that the investigation be conducted under the supervision of a retired SC judge. TVK's secretary, Aadhav Arjuna, filed a plea seeking the quashing of the Madras High Court's order constituting the SIT. TVK argued that a pre-planned conspiracy by miscreants to create trouble at the rally site could not be ruled out.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing the Tamil Nadu government, stated that the SIT was formed by the High Court itself, and the state did not provide any names. Rohatgi assured the court that the officers appointed to the SIT are known for their integrity and independence, and there was no reason to doubt their impartiality.
The Supreme Court has reserved its order on the pleas seeking an independent probe into the incident. The court will also pass appropriate orders on the issue of certain victims' pleas seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the incident.
Eyewitness accounts suggest that security guidelines were allegedly violated, and there was a lack of proper arrangements for food and water, contributing to the tragedy. Police also cited a seven-hour delay by Vijay in reaching the venue as a contributing factor.
