The Tamil Nadu government has mounted a significant legal challenge against the Supreme Court's interim order directing a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the tragic Karur stampede case. In a detailed affidavit filed before the apex court, the state has sought a recall of the order, urging the court to allow the Special Investigation Team (SIT) appointed by the Madras High Court to continue its investigation.
State Cites Supreme Court's Own Warnings on CBI Transfers
The state's legal argument hinges heavily on recent Supreme Court judgments that caution against the routine transfer of investigations to the CBI. The affidavit specifically references an order delivered on October 15 by a bench of Justices J K Maheshwari and Vijay Bishnoi. This judgment emphasized that the power to direct a CBI investigation is an extraordinary one, to be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances where the material on record prima facie necessitates such a transfer.
The state contends that the interim order for a CBI probe, passed on October 13 by a bench of Justices J K Maheshwari and N V Anjaria, did not meet this high bar. The bench had noted that the stampede, which resulted in multiple deaths, shook the "national conscience" and had a "political undertone." However, Tamil Nadu argues that the court passed an interim order which is final in nature without giving the state an opportunity to file its counter-response to the allegations.
Allegations of Political Motivation and Threat to Federalism
The state's affidavit makes a pointed allegation regarding the petitioner on whose plea the CBI probe was ordered. It claims the petitioner is politically motivated, being a member of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The state warns that accepting such allegations as a sufficient basis for CBI intervention would "open the floodgates for political misuse of central investigative agencies."
This, the state argues, would undermine state autonomy and the constitutional balance of power. "The interim order sets a dangerous precedent, whereby, every politically sensitive case may be sought to be removed from state jurisdiction, contrary to the federal structure and judicial self-restraint emphasized by the constitution bench," the affidavit states. It underscores the principle that judicial interference with investigations should be minimal and invoked only when compelling reasons like bias or mala fide are clearly established.
State's Version of Events and Defense of SIT Probe
In its filing, the Tamil Nadu government also presented its account of the stampede's cause. It blamed the organizers and cadre of the TVK party, alleging that "the caravan wilfully deviated from the prescribed route" finalized in a coordination meeting. The state claims this was done by taking wrong turns in direct defiance of repeated police instructions, leading to the chaotic and deadly situation.
The state is now urging the Supreme Court to recall its October 13 order and allow the Madras HC-appointed SIT, which is already probing the case, to complete its investigation. The legal battle brings to the fore critical questions about:
- The appropriate use of central investigative agencies in state matters.
- The threshold for judicial transfer of cases.
- The preservation of the federal structure in law and order issues.
The Supreme Court's decision on Tamil Nadu's recall application will be closely watched, as it will have significant implications for the future handling of similar incidents with political overtones across India.
