The Kerala High Court dismissed Pankaj Bhandari’s plea in the Sabarimala gold misappropriation case, upholding his arrest and rejecting claims of procedural violations, illegal detention, and lack of documented grounds. Justice A. Badharudeen stressed due process, legal news, ruling.
KERALA: The Kerala High Court has dismissed a petition from Pankaj Bhandari, the owner of Smart Creations, challenging his arrest related to the Sabarimala gold misappropriation case.
Justice A. Badharudeen ruled against Bhandari’s petition, which argued that his arrest was illegal and did not adhere to established legal procedures, including the failure to present grounds for the arrest.
The case involves allegations of missing gold from the gold-plated coverings of the Dwarapalaka idols and the door frames leading to the sanctum of the Sabarimala temple. The gold is said to have disappeared following certain repair works conducted by Unnikrishnan Potti at Smart Creations, a private firm based in Chennai.
It is alleged that Potti and Bhandari conspired to misappropriate the gold cladding affixed to the copper plates of the temple structures. Several kilograms of gold were reported missing after the plates were measured post-repair, with some of the gold allegedly recovered from Potti’s sister’s residence. It is alleged that Potty brought the gold-clad items to Smart Creations, where their gold was stripped, with the knowledge that it belonged to the Travancore Devaswom Board.
Investigations indicated that in 2019, the TDB removed gold-plated copper sheets and pedestals from the Dwarapalaka idols for refurbishment by a Chennai based firm, Smart Creations. According to the mahazar dated July 19, 2019, the copper plates weighed 25.400 kg and the Peedams weighed 17.400 kg, totaling 42.800 kg. However, upon arrival in Chennai on August 29, 2019, their weight was noted as only 38.258 kg, revealing a deficit of 4.541 kg.
In response to these developments, a Special Investigation Team (SIT) was formed to investigate the case as directed by the Kerala High Court.
Bhandari has been named as an accused in two first information reports (FIRs) filed by the Crime Branch in Thiruvananthapuram, facing multiple charges under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including Sections 403 (dishonest misappropriation), 406 (criminal breach of trust), 409 (criminal breach of trust by public servant), 466 and 467 (forgery), as well as Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
In his plea, Bhandari argued that his arrest by the SIT infringed upon his fundamental rights and statutory protections related to arrest and remand. He maintained that he had fully cooperated with investigators since September 2025, voluntarily appearing before the SIT multiple times and providing travel documents, invoices, and even surrendering 109.243 grams of gold recovered during a search at his Chennai office, which he claimed was conducted cooperatively.
Despite this cooperation, Bhandari asserted that he was summoned to the SIT’s office on December 19, 2025, where he was taken into custody and subsequently arrested. He alleged that his arrest lacked justification, proper communication of grounds, and timely access to legal counsel.
The petition stated,
“The grounds of arrest contain no grounds or reasons of arrest whatsoever and simply state that ‘your arrest in this case is inevitable.’ There is not even a whisper as to why the arrest of the petitioner was required or necessary,”
Bhandari also pointed out that the remand application and proceedings were conducted in Malayalam, a language he does not understand, given that he is a Tamil speaker. He argued that this deprived him of a fair hearing, directly violating Article 22(1) (fundamental safeguards for any person arrested or detained) of the Indian Constitution.
Thus, he sought to have the Court quash the orders related to his arrest and remand, declaring it illegal. However, the State contended that all legal requirements were fulfilled and that the arrest was carried out in accordance with the law.
The ADGP contended that the grounds for the arrest were communicated to Bhandari and his staff member, Rajasekharan S., on the day of his arrest, and that later, his wife was also informed via email.
While hearing the current plea, the Court criticized the Special Investigation Team for its delay in submitting the final report, which has resulted in some accused being granted statutory bail.
After reviewing the submissions, the Court rejected Bhandari’s petition.
Senior Counsel B. Raman Pillai, along with advocates S. Vishnu, V.S. Viswambharan, Naik Chirag Dhananjay, Mathrawala Noopur Vishal, Mahesh Bhanu S., R. Anil, Sujesh Menon V.B., and Lilin Lal represented Bhandari, while Additional Director General of Prosecution Gracious Kuriakose represented the State.
A detailed copy of the order is yet to be released.
Case Title: Pankaj Bhandari v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Read Live Coverage:
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
