New Delhi, July 7:
The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday declined to entertain a petition filed by DMK leader R. S. Bharathi seeking to restrain Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Vijay and other accused persons from making public comments or interacting with victims’ families in connection with the Karur stampede case.
A Bench comprising Justices K. V. Viswanathan and Alok Aradhe expressed its unwillingness to examine the plea, raising concerns over whether such directions would amount to curbing freedom of speech.
During the hearing, senior advocate Ranjit Kumar, appearing for the petitioner, argued that the accused were attempting to shape a narrative around the incident and could influence witnesses, especially under the guise of offering compensation. He also alleged that despite restrictions, public statements were being made in the media.
However, Justice Viswanathan questioned the maintainability of the plea, observing whether the apex court could regulate what a Chief Minister should or should not say. “Are you asking us to impose restrictions on free speech?” the Bench asked, adding that in a case under investigation by the CBI, it would be difficult for the court to continuously monitor or restrict political statements.
The petition had raised objections to Chief Minister Vijay’s proposed meeting with victims’ families on July 10, where he is expected to distribute government relief measures, including compensation and compassionate appointments. The plea argued that such interactions could potentially influence witness testimonies while the investigation is ongoing.
It also referred to remarks allegedly made by Minister Aadhav Arjuna on July 2, in which he reportedly spoke of “settling scores” over the incident and blamed the previous DMK regime.
Following the court’s observations, the DMK chose to withdraw the petition. At the same time, the Supreme Court granted the petitioner liberty to pursue other legal remedies available under the law.
The Karur stampede case, which is currently under a CBI probe, continues to remain a politically sensitive issue in Tamil Nadu, with legal and political developments unfolding alongside the ongoing investigation.