The Karnataka High Court on Thursday questioned the state government’s decision to suspend five police officers following the June 4 stampede near M Chinnaswamy Stadium in Bengaluru.
A bench comprising Justices SG Pandit and TM Nadaf suggested the move may have been excessive, and asked whether transferring the officers to different roles might have been more appropriate.
The court is dealing with the suspension of a senior cop, Vikash Kumar Vikash, over the stampede that killed 11 people during RCB’s victory party. An administrative court already cleared him to return to duty, but the state is appealing that decision, arguing he shouldn’t be back.
The tragedy sparked criticism of both planning and crowd control. A day later, the state suspended Vikash along with four other senior officers, including then Police Commissioner B Dayananda.
The tribunal, calling the suspension “mechanical,” directed the government to immediately reinstate Vikash. It also recommended similar treatment for the other four officers, though they were not petitioners in the case.
At Thursday’s hearing, Advocate General Shashikiran Shetty argued the tribunal overreached by suggesting relief for officers who weren’t parties to the case. He maintained the suspensions were justified due to what he described as clear dereliction of duty.
“I will be able to show from the records that the suspension order was justified,” Shetty told the court, asking for the tribunal’s order to be stayed.
The court declined to issue a stay for now and scheduled the next hearing for July 9.
In the meantime, the bench asked that Vikash avoid taking further steps that might escalate matters. This came after the court was informed that he reported to duty in uniform the day after the tribunal ruling, without awaiting formal reinstatement from the government.
Vikash’s lawyer, senior advocate Dhyan Chinappa, assured the bench that his client would refrain from any action until the matter is heard again.
Vikash had earlier argued before the tribunal that he wasn’t responsible for the stampede. He claimed that RCB had announced the public event and issued free passes before receiving police clearance. The tribunal noted this, adding that law enforcement had insufficient time to plan security.
The state’s appeal warned that reinstating the officers while judicial and magisterial inquiries were ongoing could affect the credibility of the probes. The government argued that Vikash’s presence in service might interfere with witness testimony and undermine the justice process.
As the legal process continues, the high court’s remarks suggest it may be looking for a middle ground. Whether that includes reinstatement, transfers, or disciplinary review remains uncertain until the next hearing.
