The Karnataka High Court has expressed serious concern over allegations of sexual offences against minor boys residing at the mutt of yoga practitioner Vachanananda Swamiji, popularly known as Shwaasa Guru, and indicated that it would set aside the anticipatory bail granted to him in a case registered under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
The single-judge Bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna orally observed on Tuesday that the allegations suggested that not only minor girls but even minor boys appeared to be unsafe. The Court indicated that the anticipatory bail granted by the Special Court could not be sustained and stated that it was inclined to set aside the order while reserving liberty to the accused to seek regular bail before the competent court.
The Bench clarified that the mere filing of a chargesheet does not automatically justify cancellation of anticipatory bail. However, it observed that the circumstances under which the relief had been granted warranted judicial interference. Justice Nagaprasanna remarked that anticipatory bail in a case involving such allegations ought not to have been granted in the manner it was and indicated that the order was legally unsustainable.
At the same time, the Court observed that since the accused had already been enjoying the benefit of anticipatory bail, a limited period of protection could be continued to enable him to approach the appropriate court for regular bail. The Bench indicated that protection for a brief period of around 10 to 15 days could be considered for that purpose.
The Court also declined to examine the merits of another criminal complaint allegedly registered against the Swamiji, observing that such an exercise at this stage would amount to repeating the same error which, according to the Court, had been committed by the court below while granting anticipatory bail.
The proceedings arose from a petition challenging an order passed on May 2 by a Special POCSO Court in Davanagere granting anticipatory bail to the Swamiji. The Special Court had taken note of social media posts and public statements made by a trustee of the mutt indicating that attempts were allegedly being made to falsely implicate him amid an administrative dispute within the Veerashaiva Lingayatha Panchamasali Peetha.
Appearing for the respondent, counsel submitted that the chargesheet had already been filed and sought time to place objections on record. It was contended that the allegations stemmed from disputes among trustees of the mutt and that the Swamiji had already been removed from the institution. The defence further argued that before registration of the criminal case, certain trustees had publicly announced through press conferences and social media that they intended to initiate proceedings against him. According to the respondent, these circumstances formed the basis of his apprehension that he would be falsely implicated in a criminal case.
Senior Advocate D.R. Ravishankar, appearing in the matter, submitted that the respondent was already enjoying the protection of anticipatory bail and suggested that if the matter were to be heard shortly, the protection period could be restricted to one week. He further contended that apart from the bail order, no additional material had been placed before the Court and alleged that after the present proceedings were initiated, the complainant had again approached the police, leading to registration of another complaint.
The background of the dispute was also placed before the Court. According to the Swamiji’s case before the Special Court, the Veerashaiva Lingayatha Panchamasali Peetha was established in 2008 and disputes regarding its administration surfaced after the death of Dr. Mahanta Shivacharya Swamiji in 2012. The Swamiji claimed that after assuming charge as Jagadguru, he raised allegations of financial irregularities against certain trustees, resulting in hostility, efforts to remove him from the Peetha and attempts to initiate criminal proceedings against him. He further alleged that trustees had threatened through media interactions to foist a POCSO case by persuading parents of children residing at the mutt to lodge complaints. The Swamiji also claimed that his role in the Panchamasali reservation movement had generated political hostility against him.
The criminal proceedings commenced after the mother of an alleged victim lodged a complaint at Lakshmeshwar Police Station in Gadag district on May 7. A Zero FIR was registered under Sections 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act along with Sections 323 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code before being transferred to Harihar Rural Police Station on May 8 for investigation.
The complaint alleged that on March 20, 2024, the Swamiji sexually abused the complainant’s son and other children residing at the mutt. It was further alleged that between 2021 and 2024, several children staying at the institution were subjected to repeated sexual abuse. According to the complaint, children were allegedly stripped naked before being sent to school, compelled to massage the Swamiji’s private parts and subjected to inappropriate physical contact.
The complainant further alleged that children who resisted such acts were physically assaulted, threatened with death if they disclosed the incidents and deprived of food as punishment. The allegations also formed the basis of offences under the POCSO Act and other penal provisions.
Meanwhile, the Harihar Rural Police have independently moved the Davanagere District and Sessions Court seeking cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the Swamiji. The investigating agency submitted a report in a sealed cover before the court and contended that custodial interrogation may become necessary if the anticipatory bail is revoked. The investigating officer had also summoned the Swamiji for further questioning as part of the ongoing probe.
Proceedings before the Special POCSO Court on the police application seeking cancellation of bail were subsequently deferred after the Karnataka High Court took up the challenge to the anticipatory bail order. The Special Court adjourned its decision, observing that it would be inappropriate to pass any order while the issue remained under consideration before the High Court.
The post Karnataka High Court indicates cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to Vachanananda Swamiji in POCSO case appeared first on India Legal.