Tribunal observes RCB primarily responsible for Bengaluru stadium stampede

The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has observed that, prima facie, the Royal Challengers Bengaluru (RCB) cricket team is responsible for the massive crowd that gathered in Bengaluru for the Indian Premier League (IPL) victory celebrations on June 4, which ended in a stampede that claimed 11 lives and left several injured.

In its remarks, the tribunal noted, “Therefore, prima facie it appears that the RCB is responsible for the gathering of about three to five lakh people. The RCB did not take the appropriate permission or consent from the Police. Suddenly, they posted on social media platforms and as a result of aforesaid information the public were gathered.”

The tribunal stated that the police were not given adequate time to make the necessary preparations. “Because of shortage of time on 4 June 2025, the police was unable to do the appropriate arrangements. Sufficient time was not given to the police,” the tribunal observed while hearing the petition by a Bengaluru police officer who challenged his suspension.

The order added that members of the public were present in large numbers on the night between 3 and 4 June, and the police were occupied managing them. Simultaneously, another function had been organised by the state government at Vidhana Soudha, further stretching the force.

The tribunal was critical of the RCB’s last-minute announcement of the celebration, calling it a “nuisance”. “Suddenly, the RCB created the aforesaid type of nuisance without any prior permission. It cannot expected from the Police that within a short time of about 12 hours the Police will make all arrangements required in the Police Act or in the other rules, etc.”

The tribunal went on to defend the role of the police, stating, “Police personnel are also human beings. They are neither ‘God’ (Bhagwan) nor Magician and also not having the magic powers like ‘Alladdin ka Chirag’ which was able to fulfil any wish only by rubbing a finger.”

It concluded that to control such a gathering and make the necessary arrangements, the police require sufficient time and prior intimation, which was not given in this case.

- Ends