Former Student Exposes Delhi Baba's 9-Year History of Sexual Harassment and Student Exploitation

He stated that students who were victimized were instructed not to communicate with their families.

The Delhi baba recently arrested for sexual harassment had been engaging in inappropriate behavior with his students as far back as nine years ago, according to a former student at his institute. The self-styled godman would confiscate students' phones, isolate them in separate rooms with additional amenities, purchase expensive devices for them, and control their communications.

In an interview with NDTV on Thursday, a former student from Swami Chaitanyananda Saraswati's Sri Sharada Institute of Indian Management in Delhi's Vasant Kunj revealed that one of his friends was targeted by the spiritual leader when they were studying there in 2016. The former student claimed that local residents were aware of Chaitanyananda's harassment of students, yet parents, uninformed of these activities, enrolled their children in the institute believing that an establishment run by a spiritual figure would provide proper education with appropriate moral guidance.

The 62-year-old, whose birth name is Parthasarathy and who originates from Odisha, faced sexual harassment accusations from at least 17 women in August and was apprehended on Sunday after evading authorities for months. Three female staff members from the institute - two wardens and the associate dean - who allegedly persuaded women to comply with Chaitanyananda's demands and destroyed evidence, have also been taken into custody.

The former student mentioned that he enrolled in a two-year program at the institute in 2016. "We were informed that a trustee was a 'sanyasi' (ascetic), which led parents to believe their children would receive quality education, values, and guidance. They expected the 'sanyasi' to be peaceful. However, Chaitanyananda was quite the opposite," he explained.

"His conduct was inappropriate with both students and staff. He would become randomly aggressive and speak impulsively. Staff terminations and salary withholding were common occurrences," the former student added.

He noted that Chaitanyananda gave preferential treatment to female students by including them in events and appointing them as class leaders.

"I heard about this behavior pattern from people living near the institute who had resided there for an extended period," he recalled.

Regarding the 2016 case, the former student shared that Chaitanyananda targeted one of his friends, inviting her to meals at luxury hotels.

"At first, everything appeared normal. But then she was told she would be sent abroad and to Mathura for an internship. Sending a single individual raised suspicions. She was informed she needed to depart in three days. Subsequently, she decided to leave the institute, and I assisted her with this," he recounted.

The student also filed a First Information Report (FIR) against Chaitanyananda.

The former student described how students favored by Chaitanyananda received separate accommodations with enhanced facilities.

"Their mobile devices were confiscated and replaced with premium phones from brands like Blackberry and Apple, allowing him access to their communications and the ability to delete messages. These students were instructed to avoid contact with their families and relatives," he stated.

Regarding the female accomplices, the student confirmed that one of the arrested women was employed at the institute during his time there, and she, along with her sister, wielded considerable influence. "They would encourage the female students and bring them to Chaitanyananda," he said.

Recently revealed chat messages suggest Chaitanyananda's involvement in a sex trafficking operation, including messages where he informed a student about a "Dubai Sheikh" seeking a sexual partner and asking if she knew any "nice friend."

When questioned about this aspect, the former student confirmed that Chaitanyananda definitely maintained connections with Dubai and frequently mentioned it.

"Dubai and UAE were consistently referenced. While I cannot confirm a trafficking network, individuals from Dubai regularly visited the institute. Considering what we know now, he must have been engaged in such activities," he concluded.