Will the Dharmasthala Case Witness an Extension of the Complainant's Custody?
Click to start listening
Synopsis
In a gripping turn of events, the Special Investigation Team is poised to seek an extension for the custody of Chinnaiah, the complainant in the controversial Dharmasthala case. This development comes after serious allegations concerning missing individuals and potential cover-ups emerged, raising significant public interest and scrutiny.
Key Takeaways
- The SIT is seeking an extension of custody for Chinnaiah.
- Serious allegations have emerged regarding missing individuals.
- Investigations are ongoing at multiple locations.
- Chinnaiah has made claims of coercion and manipulation.
- Authorities await forensic reports to move forward.
Mangaluru, Sep 3 (NationPress) The custody of the complainant Chinnaiah, referred to as the "masked man", by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) is set to conclude on Wednesday. The SIT is gearing up to present him before the local court and request an extension of his custody.
SIT sources have indicated their intention to seek an additional 10 days of custody for ongoing investigations.
Law enforcement has already executed searches and mahazar proceedings in Dharmasthala, Ujire, Belthangady, and Bengaluru. They are also preparing to transport him to Mandya in Karnataka, Salem in Tamil Nadu, and the national capital, Delhi.
The SIT is set to question activists Mahesh Shetty Thimarodi, Girish Mattennavar, T. Jayanth, and YouTuber Sameer, who have publicly challenged temple authorities and made serious allegations against the Dharmadhikari.
Additionally, the SIT is interrogating Sujatha Bhat, a complainant who initially reported her daughter, Ananya Bhat, an MBBS student, as missing under dubious circumstances. She later recanted her statement, claiming she had no daughter, and subsequently alleged that she was coerced into making the initial accusation.
The SIT arrested the unnamed complainant for allegedly providing false information connected to the Dharmasthala case.
After over 15 hours of interrogation, SIT officials determined that he had been misleading them.
Sources disclosed that he admitted to being enticed by certain individuals to fabricate allegations and influence the investigation's direction.
On July 11, the complainant asserted he had been compelled to bury the bodies of women and girls who were "raped" and "murdered" in Dharmasthala, and recorded this statement.
Following these grave accusations, authorities conducted excavations at 17 different locations within the temple town of Dharmasthala.
Moreover, the whistleblower purportedly submitted a skull, allegedly discovered at one of the burial sites, to the SIT.
Authorities are currently awaiting forensic science and DNA analysis reports from the sand samples collected from the 17 excavated sites.
Point of View
It is essential to uphold the principles of impartiality and integrity in reporting. The unfolding events in the Dharmasthala case reveal a complex web of allegations and investigations that demand a thorough and transparent approach. The public deserves clear answers and accountability as this case progresses.
NationPress
03/09/2025
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Dharmasthala case about?
The Dharmasthala case revolves around serious allegations made by a complainant about missing individuals and potential misconduct related to temple authorities.
Who is Chinnaiah in the Dharmasthala case?
Chinnaiah, known as the 'masked man,' is the primary complainant in the ongoing investigation and is currently in SIT custody.
What actions has the SIT taken in this case?
The SIT has conducted searches in various locations and is questioning multiple individuals connected to the allegations, seeking to uncover the truth.
What are the implications of the allegations made by Chinnaiah?
The allegations suggest a serious cover-up involving missing individuals, prompting significant investigative actions and public concern.
What can we expect next in the Dharmasthala case?
The SIT is expected to present Chinnaiah in court to request an extension of custody, while investigations continue to gather vital evidence.
