In its plea, RCB argued that a fact-finding probe by the Bengaluru District Magistrate and Deputy Commissioner is still ongoing, and no definitive conclusion has been reached on the team’s involvement
Published Jul 09, 2025 | 4:16 PM ⚊ Updated Jul 09, 2025 | 4:16 PM
RCB moves Karnataka High Court to expunge CAT remarks linking team to Chinnaswamy stadium stampede(Sriharikanth)
Synopsis: The Karnataka High Court has issued notice on a plea by Royal Challengers Bengaluru (RCB), contesting adverse remarks by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) linking the team to the Chinnaswamy Stadium stampede that killed 11. A bench of Justices S.G. Pandit and T.M. Nadaf heard the petition and listed the matter for further hearing on 17 July
The Karnataka High Court has issued notice on a petition filed by Royal Challengers Bengaluru (RCB), challenging adverse remarks made against it by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) in connection with the stampede outside the Chinnaswamy Stadium that claimed 11 lives.
A division bench comprising Justices SG Pandit and TM Nadaf heard the matter and directed issuance of notice to the respondents. The case has now been listed for further hearing on 17 July.
The stampede occurred earlier this year ahead of a victory celebration organised by RCB following their 2025 IPL title win.
In a strongly worded order reinstating a police officer suspended for alleged negligence, the CAT had observed that the RCB’s actions contributed significantly to the tragedy.
“Prima facie it appears that RCB is responsible,” the tribunal had stated, adding that the team had neither sought permission from the police nor given officials sufficient time to prepare. “Suddenly, the RCB created the aforesaid type of nuisance without any prior permission,” CAT noted.
RCB, however, has contested these observations, arguing that the tribunal violated principles of natural justice by making such remarks without giving the team a chance to be heard.
In its plea before the High Court, RCB pointed out that a fact-finding inquiry into the incident is currently underway by the Bengaluru District Magistrate and Deputy Commissioner, and no authoritative conclusion has yet been drawn about the team’s role.
“The findings of fact are still awaited, and there is no conclusive determination of the petitioner’s involvement. The CAT’s observations are therefore premature and unwarranted,” the petition stated, urging the High Court to expunge the remarks from the tribunal’s order.
(Edited by Ananya Rao)
