The Karnataka government's decision to construct a massive international cricket stadium near Bannerghatta National Park (BNP) has drawn sharp criticism from green activists and local residents, even as the Supreme Court continues to examine the eco-sensitive buffer zone surrounding the park.
Stadium details and location
The proposed 80,000-capacity stadium, touted to be the second largest in India, is to be built at Indlawadi village in Anekal taluk of Bengaluru Urban district. Chief Minister Siddaramaiah is scheduled to lay the foundation stone on Saturday. The 70-acre site identified for the stadium falls within the larger eco-sensitive zone (ESZ) of BNP, the extent of which remains under judicial scrutiny.
Buffer zone controversy
In 2020, the buffer zone around BNP was reduced from 268 square kilometers to 168 square kilometers through a government notification. However, after the move was challenged in the Supreme Court, a court-appointed Central Empowered Committee (CEC) inspected the area earlier this year and recommended restoring the original 268 square kilometer buffer zone. The stadium project, estimated to cost Rs 943.4 crore, is being developed by the Karnataka Housing Board (KHB), which floated tenders in April.
Environmental concerns
Activists questioned how the government could proceed with the project when the ESZ issue is still pending before the apex court. They warned that floodlights, heavy traffic, crowd noise, and rapid urbanization could severely disturb the fragile ecosystem around BNP. Activists noted that the region is a critical elephant corridor and an important ecological link connecting the Cauvery and Male Mahadeshwara wildlife sanctuaries.
Shivakumar, a farmer from Indlawadi village, said the project site is barely half a kilometer from the forest boundary. “The stadium will create a lot of noise and disturb animals. In such situations, their behavior could become unpredictable and that could endanger farmers and villagers in the vicinity,” he said.
The opposition underscores the tension between development and conservation, with the fate of the buffer zone now resting with the Supreme Court.
