Why Did the Court Deny Bail to TDB Ex-Chief Padmakumar in the Sabarimala Gold Heist Case?
Synopsis
Key Takeaways
- Kollam Vigilance Court denies bail to A. Padmakumar.
- Investigation focuses on alleged misappropriation of temple assets.
- Padmakumar claims collective decision-making among board members.
- Unnikrishnan Potti, another accused, seeks bail.
- Ongoing scrutiny by Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau.
Kollam, Dec 12 (NationPress) The investigation into the Sabarimala gold heist took a pivotal turn on Friday, as the Kollam Vigilance Court denied bail to the former President of the Travancore Devaswom Board (TDB), A. Padmakumar. This decision came as the court dismissed his request related to the Kattillappalli sub-case, representing a setback for the senior CPI(M) leader amidst increasing scrutiny over alleged procedural errors and suspected unauthorized handling of temple properties.
Padmakumar is a past CPI(M) legislator who served the Konni Assembly constituency and is known to have close ties with Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan.
In his bail application, Padmakumar contended that the decision to transfer the palika (gold sheets) to the first accused, Unnikrishnan Potti, was a collective choice made with full awareness and endorsement from all board members.
He asserted that the minutes of the meeting—controversially documenting the materials as “copper” instead of gold—were recorded transparently with the board's collective agreement.
In his plea, Padmakumar expressed strong disapproval of being singled out as the sole accused for a decision he claimed was a shared responsibility among the institution’s leadership.
He alleged that investigative bodies were trying to isolate him while sparing other members who, he insisted, shared equal accountability.
However, this argument did not sway the court, which declined to grant bail.
This ruling is considered a crucial development in the high-profile case concerning the alleged misappropriation and smuggling of temple assets from the revered Sabarimala shrine.
The Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB), leading the investigation, continues to scrutinize procedural violations and suspected record manipulation.
Meanwhile, the main accused, Unnikrishnan Potti, has also filed a bail request with the Kollam Vigilance Court, with his hearing scheduled for December 18. The outcome could significantly affect the broader investigation.
With the VACB intensifying its scrutiny, and the courts adopting a stringent approach, the Sabarimala gold heist case is poised to remain a focal point in both political and legal discussions in the upcoming weeks.
Currently, six individuals have been apprehended, all of whom are in custody. In the near future, the Kerala High Court-appointed SIT is expected to document the arrest of additional suspects and may summon more for questioning.