The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to entertain a petition filed by the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam seeking to restrain Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Vijay and other Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam leaders from making public statements about the Karur stampede, which had left 41 persons dead, Bar and Bench reported.

The stampede took place on September 27 at Vijay’s rally in Karur when he was addressing supporters from his campaign vehicle. The first information report alleged that while permission had been granted for 10,000 attendees, more than 25,000 persons gathered at the venue. The Supreme Court had ordered an inquiry by the Central Bureau of Investigation into the stampede on October 13.

In its petition, the Opposition party sought directions to restrain the state ministers from commenting on the investigation or extending welfare benefits to families of those who died in the stampede. The party raised concerns that such interactions could influence the probe, the legal news outlet reported.

At the time of the stampede, the DMK was in power in the state. However the TVK later emerged as the single-largest party in the Tamil Nadu Assembly elections held on May 4 and Vijay became the chief minister.

The petition was filed ahead of Vijay’s meeting on Friday with the families of those who died in the incident, Live Law reported.

The DMK argued that the families were also material witnesses in the CBI investigation and that direct interaction with persons connected to the case could influence the probe, Bar and Bench reported.

The party flagged statements by TVK minister Aadhav Arjuna that allegedly projected blame on the DMK, the legal news outlet reported.

It also clarified that the DMK was not opposed to compensation being paid to the families but wanted the ruling party to be restricted from commenting on the case.

In response, the bench asked: “You want the chief minister’s visit to be regulated by the Supreme Court and fix his itinerary?”

The court also questioned whether distributing compensation and welfare benefits would affect the investigation.

“Is this a very thought of application?” Bar and Bench quoted the court as saying. “What is the sequitur? Just pause and think... Today to make this court a political fora… instead of fighting your battles outside.”

During the hearing, the DMK referred to Vijay having a “dual role” as head of the executive and as an accused in the case, Live Law reported.

The court clarified that Vijay had not been named as an accused in the original matter.

Edited by Tanya Shrivastava.