Bengaluru: The State on Wednesday (June 11) told the Karnataka High Court that the entire event organised to celebrate the victory of Royal Challenger Bangalore (RCB) in the 2025 Indian Premier League (IPL) final was illegal as no permission was sought for the event and it was only intimation.
The State informed this to Justice SR Krishna Kumar hearing pleas filed by RCB’s marketing head Nikhil Sosale and others challenging their arrest in connection with the stampede incident near M Chinnaswamy stadium claiming 11 lives.
Sosale’s counsel has raised questions on early morning arrest of Sosale on June 6and has said that his arrest did not happen in view of any investigation, but on the directions of the Chief Minister.
The counsel representing Sosale has argued that Sosale was not arrested by either Ashok Nagar police under whose jurisdiction he stays or Cubbon Park police under whose jurisdiction Chinnaswamy stadium falls but was arrested by the Central Crime Branch (CCB) and has submitted that CCB had no authority to arrest him as the probe was transferred from the CCB to CID on June 5 and he was arrested in the early hours of June 6.
Advocate General Shashi Kiran Shetty, representing the State of Karnataka, defended the arrest and submitted before the court on Wednesday that the victory celebration was a private function of RCB and the franchise did not seek permission, except for tweets and an announcement was made by RCB at 11.30 PM on June 3 after the IPL title victory at Ahmedabad.
Shetty further submitted that RCB has following of 28 lakhs, however, who is permitted to come to victory parade was not mentioned, as if they are inviting the whole world, whereas the capacity of the stadium is 33,000. It was belatedly said that the event would have limited entry, however, by then 3.5-4 lakh people had already gathered at the gates, Shetty added.
Shetty further submitted that the probe into the incident was transferred to CID on June 6 but was handed over only on June 6 and that before the handover, police officials were suspended and the officer who took charge sought assistance of CCB officers to procure the accused. It was further submitted that the deputed CCB officers did only the job of procuring and that there was no unreasonable delay in giving the required documents to the arrested persons.
Hearing into the matter is currently underway.
