Karnataka High Court Lifts SIT Probe Stay in Controversial Dharmasthala Case Investigation

Bengaluru:

The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday lifted the stay on the Special Investigation Team's probe against activists in the controversial Dharmasthala case. This marks a significant development in the ongoing investigation.

Justice Mohammad Nawaz, who headed the bench, instructed the SIT to avoid "harassing" the activists during their investigation process.

Previously, on October 30, the court had temporarily halted the investigation and restricted the SIT from proceeding against activists Girish Mattennavar, Mahesh Shetty Timarody, Vittal Gowda, and T. Jayath. These individuals had been leading protests against temple authorities over allegations of mass killings.

The activists have filed a petition with the High Court seeking to nullify the FIR and investigation against them.

B N Jagadeesh, the SIT's Special Public Prosecutor (SPP), informed the court that the investigation was proceeding with the magistrate's approval. He also pointed out that these same activists had previously expressed appreciation for the SIT's investigative work.

S Balan, representing the activists, contended that his clients had received notices nine times and undergone repeated interrogations. He stated that the petitioners were named as accused in the FIR, with notices delivered via WhatsApp rather than in person.

Balan further argued that his clients are neither accused nor witnesses in the case, suggesting the notices stemmed from political, religious, and organizational rivalries.

"The inquiry process has involved questioning sessions from morning until midnight, totaling over 150 hours. Initially, an FIR was registered under Section 211(a), with additional sections added later," Balan explained.

In response, SPP Jagadeesh argued that Chinnayya, known as the "masked man," filed his complaint at the instigation of the petitioners, and later made specific allegations against them.

The prosecutor informed the court that investigations included excavations and inspections at 20 locations throughout Dharmasthala village. Notices were issued to the petitioners after they became suspects in the case.

Jagadeesh added that after failing to respond to the initial notice, a fresh notice under the same section was issued to the petitioners.

After considering arguments from both sides, Justice Mohammad Nawaz had previously ordered the investigation stayed until November 12.

On July 11, Chinnayya, the complainant, claimed in court that he had been forced to bury women and girls who were raped and murdered in Dharmasthala. He requested that the bodies be exhumed in his presence, alleging that the victims showed clear evidence of sexual assault.

The whistleblower reportedly provided the SIT with a skull allegedly recovered from one of the burial sites. State Home Minister G Parameshwara confirmed the recovery of this skull.

However, in a subsequent development, the SIT arrested Chinnaiah, the previously unknown complainant and "masked man," charging him with providing false information.