Dharmasthala mass burial case took a turn when the complainant witness admitted in Belthangady court that the skull he produced was not from the buried body, after which SIT officials immediately took him into custody.
The Special Investigation Team (SIT) presented the complainant witness in the Dharmasthala mass burial case to the Belthangady court. Sources indicate that the witness had previously claimed he exhumed one of the bodies he had buried and produced a human skull he said belonged to it.
However, during questioning, he was unable to clearly articulate the location from which he recovered the skull.
The SIT interrogated him until late Friday night, at which point he acknowledged that the skull he presented did not match the body he had buried. Following this admission, SIT officials took him into custody.
ALSO READ: Dharmasthala Temple Burial | Karnataka High Court Quashes Trial Court’s Media Gag Order
In contrast to earlier instances where he was allowed to leave with his legal team after questioning, he was retained by officials on Friday night. He was subsequently brought before the court on Saturday morning after undergoing a medical examination.
To date, the SIT has conducted exhumations at 17 of the 18 sites in Dharmasthala village that the complainant witness had identified. Human remains were discovered at one of the excavated sites and on the surface of another.
These remains have been sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) for analysis, and the report is pending.
The case originated from allegations made by a former sanitation worker at the Dharmasthala Manjunathaswamy Temple.
The worker claimed in a police complaint that he had been coerced by his supervisors to bury numerous bodies, including those of women, for nearly two decades. While the complaint did not name specific individuals as offenders, these revelations sparked considerable public discourse and media attention.
In response, Harshendra Kumar filed a civil defamation suit in a Bengaluru sessions court, listing a staggering 8,842 allegedly defamatory links. This included 4,140 YouTube videos, 932 Facebook posts, 3,584 Instagram posts, 108 news articles, 37 Reddit posts, and 41 tweets.
The orders stem from a defamation suit filed by Harshendra Kumar, Secretary of Dharmasthala temple institutions, who alleged that 8,842 pieces of content were defamatory. This included:
- 4,140 YouTube videos
- 932 Facebook posts
- 3,584 Instagram posts
- 108 news articles
- 37 Reddit posts
- 41 tweets
The trial court then passed a blanket injunction restraining publication of any content related to the Dharmasthala controversy.
Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge Vijay Kumar Rai, On July 18, issued a blanket gag order until August 5 against any reporting on the matter.
Kudla Rampage subsequently challenged this order in the Karnataka High Court. On August 1, the High Court lifted the restraining order on the YouTube channel, but the gag order largely remained in effect for other media outlets.
Click Here to Read More Reports On the Dharmasthala Mass Burial Case