Bengaluru, Jan 30 (NationPress) Senior BJP MLA and former minister S. Suresh Kumar raised concerns on Friday regarding the Karnataka government’s inaction on the delayed final report from the Special Investigation Team (SIT) that was set up to investigate the high-profile Dharmasthala case.

He questioned how long the esteemed Hindu pilgrimage center would have to endure the shadow of suspicion.

Suresh Kumar made these statements while addressing the Legislative Assembly in Bengaluru, as part of the motion of thanks for the Governor’s address.

“The situation has led devotees to question their beliefs. Some have even suggested a decrease in visitors to Dharmasthala,” he noted.

“The integrity of faith in Lord Manjunatheshwara has been compromised. An SIT was established to address these concerns—yet where is the report? Must Dharmasthala continue to suffer this stigma?” he demanded.

He also referenced the matter reaching the Supreme Court, which remarked that the petition was not a Public Interest Litigation, labelling it as ‘paisa vasool litigation’—the exact terms used by the court.

Criticizing the government’s response, Suresh Kumar stated, “Dharmasthala is a holy site. Initially, Home Minister G. Parameshwara and Mangaluru district in-charge minister Dinesh Gundu Rao affirmed the local police's ability to manage the investigation. Yet, the government abruptly constituted an SIT.”

He mentioned that Minister Rao later claimed the SIT was not intended to be formed and was only established after various delegations met with the ministers. The SIT, led by senior IPS officer Pronab Mohanty, included DIG M.N. Anuchet, who later withdrew, as did IPS officer Sowmyalatha. The SIT was formed due to allegations of suspicious deaths at Dharmasthala over the years,” he explained.

Suresh Kumar highlighted claims from the government about local police inadequacies in the investigation, attempts to silence the case, pressures from Public Interest Litigations, public protests, and the influence of a major religious institution as reasons for establishing the SIT.

“We were not opposed to the formation of the SIT. The government asserted it was created to regain public trust in the police. However, I ask: what is the current progress of the SIT investigation? We have consistently requested the interim report be presented to the House, yet the government insists that only the final report will be provided,” he expressed.

Addressing recent events, he mentioned “high drama” involving a masked individual and other incidents. “Activists have been arrested, released, and even externed. What is the result of the SIT probe initiated by the government? Why has the report not been revealed yet?” he queried.