The Kerala High Court has denied bail to three accused, including former Travancore Devaswom Board president A Padmakumar, in the Sabarimala gold theft case. The Court noted the serious allegations of misappropriation of nearly 4 kg of temple gold during repair works.
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday refused to grant bail to three accused arrested in the Sabarimala gold theft case, holding that the seriousness of the allegations did not justify their release at this stage.
Justice A Badharudeen pronounced the order while hearing the bail pleas filed in Roddam Pandurangaiah Naga Govardhan v State of Kerala and connected cases. The Court denied bail to former Travancore Devaswom Board (TDB) President and senior CPI(M) leader A Padmakumar, former TDB Administrative Officer B Murari Babu, and Karnataka-based jeweller Roddam Pandurangaiah Naga Govardhan.
The case relates to criminal proceedings registered over the alleged misappropriation of gold from the Sabarimala Temple, specifically from the Dwarapalaka idols and the gold-clad door frames of the Sreekovil.
According to the investigation, after repair works were completed and the temple items were returned, the gold coverings were found to be nearly four kilograms lighter.
Padmakumar was the President of the Travancore Devaswom Board in 2019, the period during which the alleged theft is said to have taken place. He was arrested by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing the case after being questioned at a confidential location in Thiruvananthapuram.
The police have claimed that he played a direct role in facilitating the misappropriation of gold by conspiring with the prime accused, Unnikrishnan Potti.
As per the prosecution, Padmakumar allegedly described gold-clad copper sheets as mere “copper sheets” in the agenda notice of a TDB meeting held in March 2019. This, the police say, enabled Potti to receive the temple items and later misappropriate the gold.
Unnikrishnan Potti, who had sponsored the repair work of the temple items, is alleged to have gained access to the gold under the cover of these repair activities, aided by irregularities committed by TDB officials.
Senior Advocate P Vijayabhanu appeared for Padmakumar and Govardhan in their bail applications. He argued that the allegation against Padmakumar was only related to a violation of the Devaswom Manual, which, according to him, “could not be considered a crime”.
He further submitted that Govardhan, the jeweller, had no role in the alleged misappropriation of gold and had only paid for the restoration of the temple items and made donations to the temple on several occasions.
The Court was also informed that during a raid conducted on October 24, 2025, the SIT had forcibly taken 474.97 grams of 24-karat imported gold from Govardhan’s shop and residence. The defence contended that both Padmakumar and Govardhan had fully cooperated with the investigation and that their arrests were unnecessary, making them entitled to bail.
On behalf of former TDB Administrative Officer Murari Babu, Advocate S Rajeev submitted that his client had already been in custody for more than 80 days and that his custodial interrogation was no longer required.
The State strongly opposed the bail pleas of all three accused, stressing the gravity of the offence and the alleged conspiracy involved in the misappropriation of temple gold.
Advocates Thomas J Anakkalunkal, Anupa Anna Jose Kandoth, Jayaraman S, Dhanya Synny, and Ann Milka George also appeared for the bail applicants.
After hearing all sides, the Kerala High Court declined to grant bail to the accused, allowing the investigation in the Sabarimala gold theft case to continue.
Read More Reports On Sabarimala Gold Theft Case
