The Kerala High Court dismissed a petition filed by Pankaj Bhandari, Chief Executive Officer of Smart Creations, challenging the legality of his arrest in connection with the alleged gold theft from the Sabarimala temple, rejecting his contention that his detention was unlawful. The plea was heard before a bench of the High Court, which pronounced its order after considering arguments from senior counsel representing Bhandari as well as submissions from the prosecution. The detailed written order is awaited, but in open court the bench rejected the contention that Bhandari’s arrest was illegal. Bhandari had been arrested on December 19 and was in custody at the time the order was delivered. The High Court’s decision to dismiss the petition brings to an end his challenge to the circumstances of his arrest in the broader criminal investigation into the alleged misappropriation of temple gold. Pankaj Bhandari’s plea claimed that the grounds of arrest were not properly communicated either to him or to his relatives at the time of his arrest, and that he was denied legal consultation at the time of remand. The defence argued that language barriers compounded the problem, asserting that because Bhandari does not speak Malayalam, the remand orders and other documents in that language were insufficient to constitute proper communication of the grounds of arrest.
The prosecution countered these claims by asserting that the grounds of arrest were communicated on the same day to Bhandari and a staff member, and that his wife was later informed by email. The High Court, after hearing both sides, rejected the petition, effectively upholding the arrest and the validity of the processes followed by the investigating authorities.
The allegations against Bhandari and others in the Sabarimala gold theft case are that a conspiracy was hatched to misappropriate the gold from the dwarapalaka idols and other gold-clad parts of the sanctum sanctorum of the Sabarimala temple. According to the prosecution’s narrative, the first accused, Unnikrishnan Potty, together with others, knowingly misrepresented the nature of the gold-clad temple articles in official records as mere copper plates in order to take them out of the temple for plating work and misappropriate the gold. The seized items were allegedly taken to Smart Creations in Chennai, where the gold was stripped off, knowing that the items belonged to the Travancore Devaswom Board. The prosecution claims that Bhandari’s company played a role in this conspiracy by accepting the temple artefacts under these false pretences and processing them.
The High Court’s dismissal of Bhandari’s challenge to his arrest occurred against the backdrop of wider developments in the Sabarimala gold theft investigation. Other accused, including Potty and additional co-accused, have been granted statutory or regular bail by trial courts in related cases because of delays in filing final reports by the Special Investigation Team. In one instance, the former Thiruvabharanam Commissioner was granted statutory bail in the case concerning alleged misappropriation of gold from the doorframes of the Sreekovil after the investigating agency failed to file a final report within the statutory period. However, this bail did not extend to other cases in which he is named as an accused.
The High Court has also been critical of the pace at which the Special Investigation Team has progressed with the investigation. At earlier hearings in the case, the bench expressed concern that delays in filing chargesheets and completing investigative steps had resulted in some suspects being released on statutory bail, potentially jeopardising the course of justice.
The High Court’s involvement in the Sabarimala gold theft matter has been expansive, ranging from earlier orders directing the registration of criminal cases in connection with alleged misappropriation of gold from temple artefacts, and appointment of a Special Investigation Team to probe the matter, to specific directives on investigation. The bench had previously observed that the available records indicated prima facie misappropriation of temple gold, and had mandated a thorough, impartial, and expeditious inquiry to bring the perpetrators to justice. In other parts of the investigation, the Court also emphasised the need for the Special Investigation Team to probe the involvement of higher-level officials or influential persons who may have facilitated or been complicit in the conspiracy. These judicial observations underscored the grave nature of the alleged offence, involving alleged betrayal of trust reposed in the authorities and alleged misuse of sacred temple property.
The Sabarimala gold theft case has drawn significant public interest, given the religious and cultural sentiments attached to the temple and its invaluable assets. The High Court’s adjudication on bail applications, arrest challenges, investigative delays, and procedural aspects reflects the judiciary’s detailed scrutiny of the matter as it unfolds. While the dismissal of Bhandari’s challenge to his arrest affirms procedural regularity in the arrest process, the substantive investigation into the alleged misappropriation of gold continues under the supervision of investigative agencies and courts.
The prosecution’s overarching case posits that the removal, misrepresentation, and purported stripping of gold from sacred temple artefacts amounts to criminal conspiracy, theft, and breach of trust involving multiple persons, including individuals with operational influence over temple property and external entities involved in plating or processing the items. The High Court’s decisions to date illustrate the multi-faceted nature of the legal proceedings encompassing constitutional challenges, bail petitions, inquiry supervision, and investigative timelines, all of which continue to develop as the matter progresses through the criminal justice system.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.