Karnataka High Court Refuses To Grant Interim Relief To RCB Marketing Head In Bengaluru Stampede Case

The Karnataka High Court has refused to grant interim relief to Nikhil Sosale, Marketing Head of Royal Challengers Bengaluru (RCB) in a case involving stampede in Bengaluru claiming 11 lives on June 4 this year.

The Court also reserved its Order on his Petition till June 11.

A Single Bench of Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar heard arguments from both Sosale’s counsel and the State before deciding to pronounce the Interim Order.

Sosale was arrested on June 6 by the Central Crime Branch at the Kempegowda International Airport in Bengaluru, when he was about to leave for Dubai. In his Petition, he questioned the legality of his June 6 early morning arrest, alleging that the police action was influenced by political directives.

Senior Advocate S Chouta appeared for the accused while Advocate General (AG) Shashi Kiran Shetty, Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) B.A. Belliyappa, and Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) B N Jagadeesha appeared for the State.

It was contended on behalf of Sosale that the arrest was made in violation of procedure, especially since the investigation has already been transferred to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID).

“They are saying, as a superior officer, they (CCB) can arrest. But even if that power exists, it must be in writing and communicated at the time of arrest”, Senior Advocate argued, citing Section 55 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).

“Ultimately, the question is about liberty. Even if the offence is punishable with more than seven years, unless there is credible reason to believe and material on record, you cannot deprive a person of liberty”, he said, referring to a Supreme Court Judgment.

The Court further sought clarity on the notification transferring the case to the CID and questioned why the CCB suddenly intervened in the investigation.

Senior Advocate pointed to the inconsistencies in the timeline and questioned the basis of the arrests. He also argued that Sosale and the others arrested had no clear role mentioned in the FIR.

“The FIR just refers to ‘entities.’ There’s no naming of individuals. So are all members of RCB, KSCA, DNA fair game for arrest now? There are no ingredients of the offence present. It seems arbitrary and selective”, he also said.

Moreover, he submitted that Sosale was not provided with mandatory documents at the time of arrest, which he claimed violated due process.

The Court said that it would examine whether the legal process between the night of June 5 and the morning of June 6 substantiates the State’s claim.

Advocate General representing the State Government, sought time to argue the case. When interim bail for Sosale was sought, the AG opposed the plea, stating that the State’s full response would be presented the following day.

The Court recorded that the Petitioner’s counsel had been heard in full and posted the matter for further hearing to June 11. The hearing also touched upon the larger context of the incident, including political developments and administrative actions following the tragedy that claimed 11 lives and injured dozens.

The Court also noted the mention of a suo motu PIL related to the incident, which has been adjourned to June 12.

With PTI Inputs