Third round of CBI questioning for Vijay in 2025 Karur stampede case

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on Sunday questioned actor-turned-politician Vijay , founder of the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam , for over seven hours at its headquarters in connection with the 2025 Karur stampede case , officials said. The prolonged interrogation comes amid heightened political activity ahead of the Tamil Nadu Assembly elections , lending a strong political undertone to the ongoing probe.

Vijay left the agency premises around 6 pm after completing questioning and related formalities. This was his third round of interrogation , following two earlier sessions in January. Officials said the actor had initially been summoned on March 9 but sought a 15-day deferment citing campaign commitments. He also requested that questioning be conducted in Chennai or elsewhere in Tamil Nadu due to political engagements. Both requests were rejected, and he was directed to appear at the agency’s headquarters.

The CBI has also summoned Karur legislator Senthil Balaji of the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam for questioning on March 17, suggesting that investigators are examining the roles of multiple political stakeholders linked to the event.

The case pertains to the September 27, 2025, stampede during a political rally in Karur, Tamil Nadu, where at least 41 people died and more than 60 others were injured . The tragedy sparked nationwide outrage and raised serious concerns about crowd management at large political gatherings .

The investigation was handed over to the CBI from a state Special Investigation Team following directions from the Supreme Court of India , which stressed the need for an independent and impartial probe . The court also directed the CBI Director to appoint a senior officer to lead the investigation and constituted a supervisory panel headed by former judge Ajay Rastogi to monitor its progress.

A bench comprising Justices J. K. Maheshwari and N. V. Anjaria observed that the incident had left a deep imprint on the nation and carried significant implications for citizens’ safety and fundamental rights. The court emphasised that restoring public faith in the criminal justice system and ensuring justice for the victims’ families were paramount.

With elections approaching, the case has acquired a pronounced political edge , with rival parties trading allegations over the timing and conduct of the investigation. While opposition voices claim selective targeting , ruling party leaders maintain that the probe is strictly evidence-driven and aimed at accountability.