Bengaluru, June 10
The Advocate General, representing the Karnataka government, on Monday sought time to file a report regarding the June 4 Chinnaswamy Stadium stampede which claimed 11 lives during the Royal Challengers Bengaluru (RCB) team's victory celebrations.

Considering the request, the High Court Bench headed by Acting Chief Justice V. Kameshwar Rao and Justice C.M. Joshi ordered that the report could be filed on or before Thursday in a sealed cover. The matter was adjourned for further hearing on June 12.

The Karnataka High Court had taken suo motu cognisance of the stampede and had asked the state government to submit a comprehensive report.

Shashi Kiran Shetty, the Advocate General, submitted to the court that he had not yet filed the reply before the Bench. He explained that the government had set up a judicial commission and suspended police officers. He further argued that the accused were likely to use any material submitted in open court.

The Advocate General further contended that if the submission were made in open court on Tuesday, the government would be prejudged. He insisted that a report from an independent enquiry be submitted.

The court questioned him, asking if he was trying to say that the report would not be submitted before the court, and enquired about the difficulty in filing it. However, the Bench permitted the submission of the report in a sealed cover.

"You file your reply in a sealed cover by day after tomorrow. You bring it to court on that day. That would be better," the Bench underlined.

The Bench adjourned the matter, concluding that it was not making any statements now and would wait for the report. The court also stated that it would look into the impleading applications at that time.

Earlier on June 5 the Karnataka High Court sought a report from the Karnataka government on the lapses and other details concerning the stampede at the Chinnaswamy Stadium in Bengaluru.

Taking cognisance of the incident, the High Court registered a suo motu Public Interest Litigation (PIL) and sought a report from the state government.

A Division Bench, headed by Acting Chief Justice V. Kameshwar Rao, expressing concern over the tragedy, questioned the government on whether the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) were followed and if adequate guidelines were framed to handle the situation at the Chinnaswamy Stadium during the victory celebrations.

It further sought to know the total number of gates to the Chinnaswamy Stadium and how many were opened during the celebration to grant entry to fans. The Bench also questioned the absence of medical facilities at the spot and the lack of ambulances to shift those who fell sick.

The court asked whether all the deaths occurred at the gates of the Chinnaswamy Stadium.

The acting Chief Justice directed the government to submit a comprehensive status report in connection with the tragedy and adjourned the matter to June 10.

Advocate General Shashikiran Shetty, representing the government, submitted the available report on the tragedy, stating that while the seating capacity of the Chinnaswamy Stadium is 35,000, about 2.5 lakh people had gathered. He informed the court that normally, 700 police personnel are deputed to monitor the crowd during cricket matches, but during the celebration event, the Police Department had deputed 1,600 personnel to control the crowd.

People from across the state and Tamil Nadu had come to participate in the event, which led to the tragedy, he said. He further informed the court that there are 21 gates to the Chinnaswamy Stadium and, as per the information available with the government, all of them remained open.

Senior counsel G.R. Mohan submitted that only three gates remained open during the celebration event at the stadium. Senior counsel Hemanth Raj argued that there was no need for the state government to felicitate the RCB players, as they had not played for the country. He submitted that since two programs were allowed on a single day, the tragedy occurred.

Bengaluru stampede: AG seeks time to file report, HC posts matter for June 12