In a major setback to the DMK Government, the Supreme Court and the Madras High Court on October 10 rejected or declined to interfere with multiple petitions filed by the Tamil Nadu Government, marking a day of successive legal blows across key cases including the Karur stampede probe, the kidney theft case linked to a DMK MLA, and the transfer of the BSP leader Armstrong’s murder case to the CBI.
Tamil Nadu BJP former chief K. Annamalai, in a post on X, said, “Embarrassing day for the DMK Government today in the Honourable Supreme Court and the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court. The Honourable Supreme Court has refused to interfere with the order passed by the Honourable Madras High Court on the constitution of an SIT to probe into the kidney theft linked to the hospitals owned by a DMK MLA. The DMK Government accepted the SIT but imposed the condition that the Government would recommend the officers in the SIT. How shameful!”
He said, “The Tamil Nadu Government had approached the Supreme Court against the order passed by the Madras High Court for the transfer of the case related to the murder of BSP leader Armstrong avl to the CBI. The Supreme Court has refused to stay the order passed by the Madras High Court. Why is the DMK Government afraid of a CBI investigation into this matter?”
Annamalai said, “The Supreme Court has come down heavily on the Tamil Nadu Government in the case seeking a CBI enquiry into the Karur stampede during the TVK rally. The Supreme Court questioned how the Madras High Court took up a petition for hearing into the Karur stampede while the same case was being heard before the Madurai Bench.”
He said, “After a split verdict in the customs that are to be followed in the Thiruparangundram case, the third judge, Justice Vijay Kumar, has concurred with the views of Justice Srimathi and banned animal sacrifice in the Sikandar Dargah. The hill has to be called Thiruparangundram Hill. From Delhi to Madurai, justice seems to be chasing the DMK Government faster than its own conscience ever could.”
Embarrassing day for the DMK Government today in the Honourable Supreme Court and the Madurai bench of the Madras High Court.
1)The Honourable Supreme Court has refused to interfere with the order passed by the Honourable Madras High Court on the constitution of an SIT to…
— K.Annamalai (@annamalai_k) October 10, 2025
The Supreme Court, on October 10, has reserved orders on a batch of petitions seeking an independent investigation into the Karur stampede that occurred during actor Vijay’s Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) rally on 27 September 2025, claiming 41 lives.
A bench of Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice N.V. Anjaria heard the matter for over two hours and posed sharp questions to the Tamil Nadu Government and the Madras High Court over the manner in which the case was handled and the investigation ordered.
Senior Advocate V. Raghavachari, appearing for one of the victims, accused the State Police of mishandling the situation and concealing evidence, saying, “Forty post-mortems were conducted in four to five hours late at night. What sort of material were they collecting? Post-mortems are normally not conducted during the night. And they are saying there’s a one-man commission. The CM announces it in the morning. On a Sunday, the notification was published. The State, if it had been fair enough, would have handed the case to the CBI. They say we want our own officers.”
Raghavachari further alleged that the tragedy was not spontaneous, saying DMK members were heard predicting a tragedy hours before the incident.
After hearing his arguments, the Supreme Court posed questions to the Tamil Nadu Government: “Why was permission granted when there was an order [to not give permission until the SOP is finalised]? You conducted post-mortems in four hours at midnight? How many post-mortem tables are there? Two?”
Tamil Nadu counsel Wilson replied that families were pleading for the bodies to be released and that doctors from nearby districts were brought in. He said the Collector permitted conducting autopsies at night and undertook to file an affidavit addressing the bench’s queries.
The bench also scrutinised the Madras High Court’s October 3 order, which constituted an SIT made up entirely of Tamil Nadu Police officers to probe the tragedy. Addressing Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi for the State, Justice Maheshwari said, “We are unable to understand how this order was passed. In my experience of over 15 years as a judge, a single bench holds back if the division bench has taken cognisance…. I am unable to understand, the Chennai court, they are not looking at the prayer which is given. Something has to be done about propriety. Here in this case, the prayer is different, and the court considers different prayers.”
It noted that the High Court ordered an SIT probe in a petition that only sought a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for political rallies. The bench also questioned why the principal bench in Chennai passed orders when Karur falls under the jurisdiction of the Madurai Bench.
On the Karur stampede, victims and TVK seeking an independent probe or CBI investigation, Senior Advocate Gopal Subramanium, for TVK, submitted that the High Court’s adverse observations against Vijay and TVK were made without hearing them. Senior Advocate C.A. Sundaram, also for TVK, said, “To have an SIT with the officers only of the State, we have a problem. Let there be a fair investigation. We are wary of the State. All we want is an impartial investigation. Let a retired judge of the Supreme Court preside over it, we have no problem.”
After hearing all sides including petitions from victims and TVK seeking a CBI or independent probe monitored by a retired Supreme Court judge the bench reserved its order.
The Supreme Court bench of Justices J.K. Maheshwari and N.V. Anjaria has stayed a Madras High Court order that quashed the charge sheet filed by the Tamil Nadu Police in the murder case of former Tamil Nadu BSP president K. Armstrong. It, however, did not stay the High Court’s direction transferring the probe to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The court issued a notice to the Chennai Superintendent of Police on the appeal challenging the High Court order.
Comments