Understanding Crowd Disaster : An Indian Perspective.

Author: M. Radhi Rudra, School of Law, SRMIST, Chennai.

To the Point

In India, crowd disasters are becoming common. According to the Accidental Deaths & Suicides in India (2024) report by National Crime Records Bureau (2024) under the Ministry of Home Affairs, it is reported that stampede-related deathsincreased sharply from 32 in 2023 to 147 in 2024.

Use of Legal Jargon

➢ Crowd Disaster: It is a human-induced disaster resulting from an uncoordinated rush or push of people in response to a perceived danger or loss of physical space or panic, leading to high density of people and physical compression of human bodies.

➢ Crowd Management: Systematic planning, strategy,supervision of and arrangement required for orderly movement, assembly, and dispersal of people

The Proof

According to an Economic Times report dated 2 November 2025 stating that India Records 114 stampede deaths in 2025, highlighting that crowd disasters continue to pose a significant public safety challenge. People often confuse a crowd with a mob, although both are completely different A crowd is a gathering of peaceful individuals for any events or attractions while Mob is a disorderly group, often acting aggressive or harmful intent.

The common causes of Crowd Disaster are:

• Overcrowding: An excessive number of people exceeding in a confined space, increasing the risk of crowd crush, restricting freedom of movement and causing pushing and pulling. E.g: The celebration of RCB’s IPL 2025 victory, M. Chinnaswamy Stadium, which can accommodate only 34,600 spectators but nearly 2.5 lakh people assembled. contributed to a crowd diaster that resulted in 11 deaths and 56 injuries.

• Panic: A sudden threat, emergency, shock, or unexpected movement of VIPs leads to causes people to move in different directions, causing suffocation and stampede.

E.g.: On 15 February 2025, a crowd disaster occurred at New Delhi Railway Station due to delayed trains, overcrowding, and confusing platform announcements. Thousands of passengers rushed toward the same platform, causing severe congestion on staircases and the footbridge. The panic and pushing triggered a stampede, resulting in suffocation, trampling, and the deaths of 18 people.

• Poor crowd management: Insufficient planning or supervision of controlling crowd movement and responding to emergencies like failure to estimate crowd size, density, and movement. ailure to adhere to safety protocols increases vulnerability during mass events.

E.g.: On 2 July 2024, a deadly stampede occurred during a religious gathering in Hathras, Uttar Pradesh. More than 200,000 devotees attended an event permitted for only 80,000 people. As followers rushed toward preacher Bhole Baba after the ceremony, panic and overcrowding caused a stampede that killed 121 people and injured many others.

• Structural Failures: Events held in Narrow Building or congested streets cause pushing and crowd congestion view the main attraction like VIPs, deities.

• Misinformation: Spread of false information may also cause panic and crowd disasters.

E.g.: On 13 October 2013, a major crowd disaster occurred near Ratangarh Temple in Datia district, Madhya Pradesh. A rumour that a bridge was collapsing caused panic among thousands of devotees crossing it. The sudden rush led to a stampede, killing around 89 people and injuring more than 100. The incident highlighted the dangers of misinformation and poor crowd control.

• Electrical and Fire Hazards: Poor maintenance and failure of emergency systems (such as lighting, alarms, or public address systems) can make evacuation slower. These can result in crushing pressure, loss of balance trampling, and smoke inhalation.

• Coordination Gaps: Lack of coordination among event organizers, police, fire services, medical teams, and local administration. E.g.: The Puttingal Temple fire occurred at around 3:00 a.m. on 10 April 2016 in Kollam, Kerala, during a public fireworks display. A fireworks explosion triggered a massive fire, resulting in more than 100 deaths and hundreds of injuries. Investigations indicated that the event involved large quantities of fireworks and highlighted concerns about compliance with licensing requirements, safety regulations, and coordination among authorities. The incident underscored the importance of strict enforcement of fireworks regulations, inter-agency coordination, and effective emergency preparedness to prevent similar disasters.

The measures to control crowd disasters are:

• Identify the type and nature of the event, like expected crowd population including age or needs of the attendees.

• Understand the visitors purpose and be prepared for any safety or security risks.

• Plan entry, movement and move during the event.

• Consider the needs of everyone involved, such as organizers, local people, shop owners, media, and security staff.

• Manage the crowd by setting the venue’s capacity, understanding crowd behaviour, and ensuring everyone works together.

• If any location often faces crowd management issues, then improve long-term infrastructure based on visitor numbers, weather, terrain, and event frequency.

• Setting up staging points with facilities like drinking water, food, rest areas, toilets, and visitor counting systems.

• Provide separate routes for normal visitors, emergency use, and vulnerable groups such as children and elderly people.

• Use real-time crowd monitoring through CCTV surveillance, drones, and AI-based analytics.

Abstract

Crowd disasters are becoming a serious public safety issue in India, especially during religious gatherings, festivals, sports celebrations, and transportation hubs. Recent data show a rise in stampede-related deaths, highlighting the need for better planning and management of large gatherings. A crowd disaster usually occurs because of overcrowding, panic, poor crowd management, structural limitations, misinformation, fire or electrical hazards, and lack of coordination among authorities. These incidents often result in deaths and injuries that could have been prevented through proper safety measures. This paper explains the meaning of crowd disasters and crowd management, identifies the major causes with examples from recent incidents in India, and discusses practical measures to reduce such risks. It emphasizes the importance of advance planning, real-time monitoring, coordination among agencies, public awareness, and improved infrastructure. Effective crowd management can protect lives, ensure public safety, and make large public events safer and more organized.

Case Laws

1. Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam v. P.H. Dinesh & Ors., Special Leave Petition (Criminal) Diary No. 58048 of 2025, Supreme Court of India, order dated 13.10.2025.

Facts

Karur stampede that occurred on 27 September 2025 during a political rally organized by Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) in Velusamypuram, Karur District, Tamil Nadu. The rally, held after police permission was granted, attracted a massive crowd to attend the meeting addressed by TVK leader Vijay. The incident resulted in 41 deaths and over 100 injuries. Following the tragedy, an FIR was registered by the Karur Town Police, and the State Government constituted a one-member Commission of Inquiry headed by a retired High Court Judge. Several writ petitions were filed before the Madras High Court seeking transfer of the investigation to the CBI, constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT). While the Division Bench of the Madurai Bench declined to transfer the investigation at the initial stage, a Single Judge of the Principal Seat, acting beyond the relief sought in another writ petition, directed the constitution of an SIT. Subsequently, several Special Leave Petitions and writ petitions were presented before the Supreme Court, questioning the High Court’s directions and requesting an impartial investigation into the stampede incident.

Held

The Supreme Court issued notice in all connected matters and, as an interim measure, transferred the investigation of the Karur stampede to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The Court stated that transferring an investigation to the CBI is an exceptional step, but it can be considered in rare situations where it is necessary to maintain public trust, ensure an impartial investigation, and safeguard fundamental rights.Considering the magnitude of the tragedy, the allegations against the State authorities, and the public statements made by senior police officials defending the investigation, the Court found that a fair and impartial investigation required an independent agency. The Court put a stay on the functioning of the State-appointed Inquiry Commission and the Special Investigation Team (SIT) formed by the High Court. To ensure effective oversight, the Court constituted a three-member Supervisory Committee headed by retired Supreme Court Judge Justice Ajay Rastogi, assisted by two senior IPS officers, to monitor the CBI investigation. The Court also criticized the manner in which the Single Judge of the Madras High Court expanded the scope of the writ petitions without adequate pleadings and directed that the pending matter relating to SOPs for political rallies be placed before a Division Bench. The order was expressly stated to be prima facie and subject to further hearing after filing of counter-affidavits

2. Tumbalam Gooty Venkatesh vs Union Of India on 22 January, 2026

Facts:
The writ petition was filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India as a public interest petition seeking directions for improving crowd management and safety measures at political rallies and large public gatherings across India. The petitioner alleged that the absence of a national policy and binding Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for crowd control had contributed to repeated incidents of stampedes and loss of human lives. The petitioner sought directions to the Union Government to frame comprehensive national guidelines, establish a National Crowd Management and Safety Code, introduce digital platforms for regulating political rallies, and incorporate crowd safety measures into the Election Commission of India’s Model Code of Conduct. The petitioner had also submitted a representation dated 18.12.2025 before the Ministry of Home Affairs containing similar suggestions. The matter concerned the broader responsibility of governmental authorities in maintaining public safety and managing large gatherings

Held:
The Supreme Court declined to issue the requested mandatory directions and disposed of the writ petition. The Court noted that the matters involved mainly related to the creation of policies concerning law and order, crowd control, and ensuring public safety. It held that such matters require consideration by domain experts and law-enforcement authorities rather than direct judicial formulation of policy. Since the petitioner had already approached the Ministry of Home Affairs through a representation, the Court permitted him to pursue the same before the competent authority. The petitioner was also permitted to submit a copy of the writ petition as a representation to the Election Commission of India. The Court clarified that it was not expressing any opinion on the merits of the suggestions and left it to the concerned authorities to examine the proposals and take an appropriate decision. Thus, the petition was disposed of without granting the prayers for framing nationwide SOPs or establishing a National Crowd Management and Safety Code.

Conclusion

Crowd disasters have emerged as a serious threat to public safety in India, especially during large religious, political, sports, and social gatherings. Most of these tragedies are avoidable and usually arise due to overcrowding, panic situations, inadequate planning, misinformation, and poor coordination among responsible authorities. Judicial decisions also reflect the need for transparent investigations and stronger policy frameworks to manage large crowds effectively. It is essential that event organizers, law enforcement agencies, local administration, and emergency services work in close coordination to ensure proper planning, risk assessment, and quick response mechanisms. The adoption of modern technologies like CCTV surveillance, drones, and AI-based monitoring systems can significantly enhance crowd control. A well-planned, preventive, and coordinated approach is necessary to safeguard human life and ensure safer and more organized public events across the country.

FAQ

1. What factors contribute to the occurrence of crowd disasters?

Overcrowding, panic, poor crowd management, misinformation, and lack of coordination are the main causes.

2. How can crowd disasters be prevented?

They can be prevented through proper planning, crowd monitoring, controlled entry and exit, and coordination among authorities.

3. Which places are most at risk of crowd disasters?

Religious events, political rallies, sports events, festivals, and railway stations are most at risk.

Sources:
1.https://nidm.gov.in/PDF/Modules/TrgMod_CrowdatLargeCongregations.pdf

2. https://www.undrr.org/understanding-disaster-risk/terminology/hips/so0302

3. https://www.respect.org.in/img/topics/org-1476577876_crowd%20Management-ICT2014-%20Dr%20R%20K%20Dave.pdf

4. https://www.drishtiias.com/daily-updates/daily-news-analysis/crowd-management

5. https://data.opencity.in/dataset/70aabcb9-d126-492b-8a84-316f87f31598/resource/5c4317ef-58a4-4c43-85fc-5579eca0fa75/download/1adsipublication-2024.pdf