Calling it a classic case of abject surrender by the district administration, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has directed the state government to transfer the Deputy Commissioner (DC),...
Calling it “a classic case of abject surrender” by the district administration, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has directed the state government to transfer the Deputy Commissioner (DC), Superintendent of Police (SP) and Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) of Kullu within one week, holding that they had failed to maintain public order and had allegedly facilitated the organisation of large-scale rave parties in the Parvati Valley.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia and Justice Bipin Chander Negi also directed the state government to initiate departmental proceedings against the three officers. The bench also ordered registration of an FIR and constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by an officer not below the rank of Deputy Inspector General (DIG) to probe the matter.
While listing the matter for compliance on August 6, the court also directed that an IPS officer be posted as SP, Kullu, who would also be a member of the SIT.
The court issued the directives on June 24 but the detailed order was released on Saturday.
The Bench observed that despite an adverse report submitted by the Deputy Superintendent of Police (Headquarters) on June 5 warning that granting permission for DJ and music may lead to narcotics consumption and trafficking, the SDM granted sound permission to party organisers Yashpal and Ishwar Singh on June 6.
“The present case is a classic case of abject surrender by the Deputy Commissioner and Superintendent of Police, Kullu,” the bench said, adding that despite the high court being seized of the issue of rave parties in Kullu and Mandi since July 2025, the authorities had failed to discharge their duties.
The division bench passed the order while hearing a clutch of public interest litigations, including one filed by the Himalayan Environment Protection Society alleging that rave parties were being organised under the guise of tourism at Kasol, Jibhi, Manali and other tourist destinations, where narcotic substances were openly consumed and sold under political patronage and administrative protection. It was alleged that entry tickets to such parties range from Rs 5,000 to Rs 7 lakh. Hearing the matter, the court had earlier sought details from the State government regarding FIRs, arrests, organisers and action taken against such events.
The latest proceedings arose after media reports highlighted that thousands of revellers had gathered between June 7 and June 11 at Green Forest-I and Green Forest-II near Kasol. According to the court, participants reportedly paid between Rs 10,000 and Rs 16,000 each to attend the event, with visitors arriving from Bengaluru, Hyderabad, Goa, Delhi, Chandigarh and even Israel. The court, thereafter, sought reports from the DC, SP and the secretary, District Legal Services Authority (DLSA), Kullu.
The DLSA, in a report, submitted that revealed that the organisers had secured permission on June 6, despite an adverse report submitted a day earlier by the DSP. The DSP had specifically warned that the isolated venue was highly vulnerable to drug trafficking and consumption and other unlawful activities, and that the local police lacked adequate manpower to effectively monitor the event expected to attract over 3,000 participants.
The Bench also rejected the explanation offered by the district administration that permission had merely been granted for a music event at two camping sites.
“The affidavit filed by SP Madan Lal seeks to justify that permission had been sought by the organizers for a sound system/music event… It is admitted that the Deputy Superintendent of Police… submitted his report dated June 5. The said report was forwarded to the SDM but sound permission was granted on June 6,” the court observed.
Referring to the subsequent police action, the Bench noted: “The above sequence of events is sufficient to show that had there not been an intervention by the Vacation Bench on 9th June, 2026, the party would have merrily continued from June 7 to June 11, 2026, on the strength of the tacit permission of the SDM, Deputy Commissioner and the Superintendent of Police”.
The court also found contradictions between the police affidavit and the DLSA report regarding the functioning of CCTV cameras at the venue. While the police claimed no CCTV cameras were functional, the DLSA had reported that the digital video recorder (DVR) had been preserved.
During the inspection, officials reportedly found large quantities of empty liquor bottles, cigarette butts, rolling papers commonly used for cannabis consumption, refrigerators stocked with alcohol, camping facilities for hundreds of participants, high-powered DJ systems and infrastructure capable of accommodating between 4,000 and 5,000 people. The inspection also found that the event schedule extended beyond the 10-pm deadline stipulated in the permission granted by the SDM. “It was found that most of the persons were intoxicated and had to be evacuated to Kasol,” the bench noted.
The bench observed that the enforcement measures taken by the administration after June 9 appeared to be a “knee-jerk reaction” following judicial intervention rather than proactive policing.
Deputy Commissioner Anurag Chander Sharma declined to comment on the order. SDM Nishant Thakur also declined to respond, saying he has not yet seen the order. SP Madan Lal was unavailable for comment despite repeated attempts.
Responding to the order, Himachal Pradesh Advocate General Anup Kumar Rattan told The Indian Express, “The order is being studied. The state government is committed to end the drug abuse. However, there are some facts, which are yet to be made clear before the high court. We will urge the court to modify this order.”
He further said that in the government service, “transfer of a government servant is not a punishment”. “It is a method which is usually adopted to ensure that the person concerned cannot influence the proceedings. Moreover, in this particular matter, permissions were cancelled when the wrongdoings came to the light and FIRs were also registered”.