New Delhi

Actor and Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) president Vijay arrived in the national capital on Monday to appear before the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for questioning in connection with the Karur stampede case, in which 41 people lost their lives during a party campaign event in September last year.

The CBI had issued a notice to Vijay under Section 179 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), asking him to present himself for examination. The summons, dated January 6, was served earlier this month.

The investigation relates to the stampede that took place on September 27, 2025, during a TVK campaign programme in Karur district of Tamil Nadu. According to party sources, Vijay travelled from Chennai to New Delhi on a chartered flight and is expected to visit the CBI headquarters later in the day to cooperate with investigators.

The Supreme Court had earlier handed over the probe into the incident to the CBI. As part of the investigation, the agency has already questioned several senior TVK leaders in New Delhi. Party representatives have also submitted video footage to the agency, alleging administrative lapses by the Tamil Nadu government.

Investigators have examined the campaign vehicle used by Vijay during the event, and the driver of the vehicle has been questioned. The stampede occurred amid a massive political gathering, leading to 41 deaths and multiple injuries, triggering widespread public outrage and judicial scrutiny.

In December, the Tamil Nadu government filed a counter-affidavit in the Supreme Court seeking to overturn its earlier decision ordering a CBI probe into the case.

TVK, in its submission to the court, contended that the state government's counter-affidavit lacked material facts and failed to provide valid grounds for removing the jurisdiction of the CBI and the supervisory committee constituted by the apex court.

READ MORE: Real Hero Hussain Mansuri wins hearts of blind Pune students

The party also alleged that several statements made in the state government’s response were false and misleading, and argued that accepting such claims could hamper the ongoing investigation and its judicial supervision.