The Karnataka government on Thursday defended the suspension of IPS officer Vikash Kumar Vikash before the High Court, stating that the officer and his team behaved as though they were "servants of RCB" during preparations for the Royal Challengers Bengaluru (RCB) IPL victory celebration, news agency PTI reported.
The event ended in tragedy, with a stampede that killed 11 people and injured 33, leading to widespread criticism and legal scrutiny.
(Also Read: Bengaluru stampede: Karnataka govt blames RCB, points to Virat Kohli video before victory parade)
Appearing for the state, Senior Counsel PS Rajagopal argued that RCB had submitted a proposal for a victory rally even before the IPL final was played. Instead of awaiting proper authorisation, the police officers allegedly went ahead and began making security arrangements without consulting higher authorities or ensuring official permissions were in place, the report added.
“The most obvious response from the IPS officer should have been: ‘You haven’t taken permission’,” Rajagopal told the court. “Then RCB would have had to approach the High Court, and the law would have taken its course.”
He accused the officer of failing in his duty and causing “public embarrassment” by treating the celebration as a foregone conclusion, leading to serious operational lapses. Rajagopal said that making arrangements for such a large crowd in less than 12 hours was "impractical," and questioned what proactive steps had been taken in that timeframe.
{{/usCountry}}He accused the officer of failing in his duty and causing “public embarrassment” by treating the celebration as a foregone conclusion, leading to serious operational lapses. Rajagopal said that making arrangements for such a large crowd in less than 12 hours was "impractical," and questioned what proactive steps had been taken in that timeframe.
{{/usCountry}}He cited Section 35 of the Karnataka State Police Act, which empowers officers to take necessary preventive action, and said the suspended officers had failed to exercise that authority. He also noted that no consultations were held at senior levels of the police hierarchy before action was taken.
The interim suspension was not punitive but preventive, Rajagopal argued, intended to avoid further administrative damage while the matter was under investigation.
When the Division Bench of Justices SG Pundit and TM Nadaf asked who was in charge of security inside the stadium during the event, Rajagopal responded that it was the state police, acknowledging that the arrangements had been “clearly inadequate.”
He further criticised the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) for quashing the officer's suspension and took exception to the Tribunal’s empathetic remarks about the limitations of police personnel.
Reading from the CAT’s order, Rajagopal pointed out its observation that “police personnel are also human beings, not God or magicians.” He called this an "inappropriate narrative", remarking, “This is something grandparents would say. It’s not what litigants expect from a judicial forum.”
The case continues as the court examines the state’s arguments and the CAT’s decision.
(Also Read: ₹100 crore Cooperative Bank Fraud Case">ED raids over 15 locations in Bengaluru in ₹100 crore Cooperative Bank Fraud Case)