Bengaluru stampede: Panel holds 11 RCB, KSCA, DNA officials, cops liable
BENGALURU: The one-man judicial commission constituted by Karnataka's govt to probe the June 4 stampede outside Bengaluru's Chinnaswamy stadium that claimed 11 lives has held Royal Challengers Sports Pvt Ltd (RCSPL), which owns and runs RCB, event organisers DNA Entertainment, Karnataka State Cricket Association (KSCA) officials and senior police officers responsible for the tragedy.
The Justice D'Cunha Commission found that the organisers failed to obtain mandatory prior permissions — seven days before the event, as required under the Licensing and Controlling of Assemblies and Processions (Bengaluru City) Order, 2009.
'Blunder at gates'
Meanwhile in the high court, the state govt argued that police officers handling the situation on the day of the stampede had acted like 'servants of RCB management'.
Poor security arrangement due to cops-organisers nexus
The Justice John Michael D'Cunha commission, which submitted its report recently, has recommended legal action against three from KSCA: Raghuram Bhat (president), A Shankar (former secretary), and ES Jairam (former treasurer); RCSPL vice-president Rajesh Menon; two from DNA: T Venkata Vardhan (MD) and Sunil Kumar (VP); three IPS officers: B Dayananda, Vikash Kumar Vikash, Shekhar T Tekkannavar; and two more from police department: C Balakrishna and AK Girish.
The commission found that the organisers failed to obtain mandatory prior permissions — seven days before the event, as required under Licensing and Controlling of Assemblies and Processions (Bengaluru City) Order, 2009.
Pointing out that police security arrangement was grossly inadequate and ineffective, the panel said senior cops were working on 'bandobast' under direct command of additional DGP and commissioner of police, 'in nexus' with organisers, even before any formal security activation took place.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
An engineer reveals: One simple trick to get internet without a subscription
Techno Mag
Learn More
Undo
'Out of 515 personnel deputed, only 79 were posted outside the gates to control the crowd. Even these officers were not visible at the venue during the crisis,' it noted.
Control room staff failed to alert on-ground security teams stationed at the entry gates. Despite clear signs of overcrowding, the exit gates were not opened in time, which the commission termed 'a serious act of negligence and a breakdown of emergency protocols'.
The report also flagged improper and unscientific installation of barricades, combined with narrow and constricted entry gates, as a major contributing factor. Under-deployment of police at high-risk gates made the situation worse.
It concluded that the organisers themselves triggered the stampede by failing to regulate entry and by making reckless announcements about stadium access.
The situation, the commission said, was the result of 'hasty decisions and lack of preparation, amounting to recklessness bordering on gross negligence'.
Standard protocols bypassed: Karnataka govt
The 'who is responsible for the stadium stampede' debate took an interesting turn in Karnataka HC on Thursday with the state govt alleging that police officers handling the situation on the day of the tragedy had 'acted like servants of RCB management'. However, a suspended IPS officer countered it saying that govt made him a scapegoat.
Vikash Kumar Vikash had challenged govt's decision to suspend him in Central Administrative Tribunal (Bengaluru branch), which recently quashed his suspension and ordered his reinstatement.
Referring to CAT's move, govt told HC that CAT had exceeded its authority by conducting an unnecessary fact-finding mission whilst handling his petition.
Special advocate PS Rajagopal, representing govt, noted that police officers acted without proper requisition from RCB management as if they were servants of the entity. Regarding the tribunal's decision to exonerate Vikash and advise the govt to extend the relief to four other officers, he said it had overstepped its jurisdictional boundaries.
He highlighted the unprecedented events of June 3 and June 4, where RCB hastily invited people without proper procedures. He pointed out that police arrangements were made despite lacking necessary permissions, bypassing standard protocols for venue inspection and safety assessments.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
17 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Karnataka High Court recalls order quashing caste atrocity case against Infosys co-founder Kris Gopalakrishnan, IISc officials
The Karnataka High Court Thursday recalled its earlier order that had quashed proceedings under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, initiated against Infosys co-founder S Kris Gopalakrishnan and several Indian Institute of Science (IISc) officials, including Director Govindan Rangarajan and Registrar Sridhar Warrier. Justice S R Krishna Kumar passed the recall order after the complainant, Dr D Sanna Durgappa, a former IISc professor, submitted that the earlier ruling was passed without hearing his side. The court observed that the complainant and his counsel were not present – either physically or via video conferencing – on April 16, when a co-ordinate bench had allowed the petition by the accused and quashed the First Information Report (FIR). 'Learned senior counsel for petitioners would not dispute that… the respondent no 1 or his counsel were not present… and that they were not heard on that day,' the court noted. 'In that view of the facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion… and in order to provide one more opportunity to respondent no 1 to make submissions on the merits of the matter, I deem it just and appropriate to recall the final order,' Justice Krishna Kumar stated. The matter has been restored for hearing on August 7, with the interim stay on proceedings extended until then. The case involves allegations of caste-based discrimination, wrongful dismissal, and threats made by senior IISc officials and members of its Governing Council. Apart from Gopalakrishnan – Chairman of the IISc Council since 2022 – others named in the FIR include Sandya Vishwswaraih, Hari K V S, Dasappa, Balaram P, Hemalata Mhishi, Chattopadyaya K, Pradeep D Sawkar, and Manoharan. The matter stems from a private complaint filed by former IISc assistant professor Dr Durgappa, who hails from a Scheduled Caste group. He alleged that he was falsely implicated in a 2014 honey trap case, following which he was terminated from service in 2015. He also claimed caste-based abuse and threats by IISc faculty and legal representatives. The termination was legally challenged, but a settlement was reached, converting it into a resignation. Dr Durgappa received terminal benefits and agreed to withdraw related complaints pending before bodies like the National Commission for Scheduled Castes. Despite this, he filed two more complaints in 2016 and 2017 under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, which the high court quashed, noting that the allegations were an attempt to give a 'criminal colour to a civil dispute.' In 2025, he filed a third complaint with similar charges and fresh allegations against two IISc legal representatives. This led to the registration of an FIR, which the high court had quashed on April 16, stating the claims did not constitute offences under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and amounted to 'vexatious litigation.' Justice Hemant Chandangoudar had termed the FIR 'an abuse of the legal process' and permitted the petitioners to approach the Advocate General for initiating criminal contempt proceedings against Dr Durgappa. With Thursday's order, the matter is now restored for fresh hearing, giving the complainant an opportunity to present his case.
News18
2 hours ago
- News18
Union Minister Law: Govt Has No Role In Impeachment Motion Against Justice Verma
Justice Varma Case |Union Minister Law: Govt Has No Role In Impeachment Motion Against Justice Verma Last Updated: India Videos | Big Exclusive - Union Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal on Justice Verma-• The government has no role in the impeachment motion against Justice Verma. • The move has been initiated by Members of Parliament, exercising their constitutional privilege, in light of corruption allegations against the judge.• The opposition's support for the motion reflects a collective stand against corruption.• Supreme Court has made a committee and made some findings these findings were sent to PM and sent to president If justice Verma has some complaints he is free to act n18oc_indiaNews18 Mobile App -
Hans India
4 hours ago
- Hans India
Stadium stampede: Govt report blames RCB, DNA Networks, KSCA
Bengaluru: The government has blamed IPL franchisee RCB, its event management partner, and the state cricket association for ignoring standard procedures and safety measures, leading to a stampede that claimed 11 lives and injured 33 others last month. In its status report on the June 4 stampede near the M Chinnaswamy stadium that was submitted to the Karnataka High Court, the state government said RCB, its event management partner, and the state cricket association unilaterally organised the team's massive victory parade and celebration without prior permission or furnishing mandatory details to the authorities. The report has been submitted to the High Court. The report emphasised that the organisers never formally sought police permission in the prescribed format as mandated by the Licensing and Controlling of Assemblies and Processions (Bangalore City) Order, 2009. It clarified that merely submitting an intimation does not amount to seeking permission, particularly for events involving large public gatherings in central Bengaluru. According to the report, at about 6.30 pm, just hours before the IPL final between RCB and Punjab Kings (PBKS) in Ahmedabad, the Karnataka State Cricket Association, on behalf of DNA Networks Pvt Ltd, RCB's event management partner, submitted a letter of intimation to the Cubbon Park police station here. 'Should RCB emerge victorious in the tournament, the management of RCB/DNA Entertainment Networks Private Limited intends to plan potential victory parades around the M Chinnaswamy Stadium, culminating in victory celebrations at the stadium. This was in the nature of an intimation, not a requisition for permission as required under the law,' the report said. However, the police denied permission due to the lack of critical information, including projected crowd size, event logistics, and crowd control measures. The proposal was also made on short notice, which precluded due processing. Despite this, RCB unilaterally proceeded on June 4, announcing a public 'Victory Parade' from Vidhana Soudha to Chinnaswamy Stadium via multiple social media posts starting at 7.01 am. A final post at 3.14 pm announced that the parade would begin at 5.00 pm and would be followed by stadium celebrations. This post was the first to mention that free passes were available online, but it came after large crowds had already started gathering. The posts garnered widespread attention, with the first four updates accumulating viewership figures of 16 lakh, 4.26 lakh, 7.6 lakh, and 17 lakh, respectively. This crowd estimate is supported by BMRCL ridership on June 4, which saw 9.66 lakh commuters compared to a daily average of six lakh. 'Therefore, including those who travelled on foot, used public transport, and private means on June 4, the estimated gathering would be well beyond three lakh individuals,' the statement said. Authorities claimed that the essential details, such as the number of participants, assembly point, timing, names and contact details of responsible organisers, and plans for traffic and crowd control, were entirely missing. This lack of information prevented police from assessing the event's scale or planning adequate safety measures. Furthermore, there was no signage or loudspeakers for public instructions, no trained staff for crowd management at entry gates and within seating areas, and no prior request for loudspeaker use or police bandobast. The organisers also failed to pay for police deployment, as mandated by the Government Order dated May 22, 2019, the report said. Despite the absence of coordination or approvals, the Bengaluru city police implemented multiple measures to manage the situation on the ground. A meeting was convened at 10 am on June 4 at the office of the Joint Commissioner of Police, where traffic and law enforcement planning was finalised. A total of 654 traffic personnel were deployed, including 4 DCPs, 6 ACPs, 23 PIs, 57 PSIs, 104 ASIs, and 462 constables. The route taken by the RCB team, from HAL to Taj West End, Vidhana Soudha, and finally Chinnaswamy Stadium, was regulated to minimise disruption. A traffic advisory and map were released through the press, social media, and FM radio, advising the public to avoid central areas and use Metro or other public transport due to limited parking. Nine diversion points were created, and 125 barricades were installed, with an additional 11 barricading zones added as a precaution. Local schools were requested to close by noon. BMTC deployed its Sarathi teams, and the E-Path app was activated for ambulance management. A dedicated control room monitored traffic movements throughout the event. Eight major sectors were identified where police personnel were stationed to regulate and manage the public. Their failure to obtain permission and coordinate with authorities ahead of time left the city administration with no option but to respond reactively to an event that had already gained momentum through social media mobilisation. 'Recognising the need for accountability within the law enforcement hierarchy, the government took action against police officials on June 5, 2025' and suspended five police officers, including three IPS officers of significant rank: the Commissioner of Police, the Inspector General and Additional Commissioner of Police, and the Deputy Commissioner of Police, alongside the Assistant Commissioner of Police for Cubbon Park and the Police Inspector of Cubbon Park, the report said.
