Sabarimala gold theft: Court cites lack of evidence as reason for granting bail to Tantri

The Kollam Vigilance Court, while granting bail in the Sabarimala gold misappropriation cases, had observed that the Special Investigation Team (SIT) failed to produce substantive evidence to support the allegations levelled against Tantri Kandararu Rajeevaru. In its bail order, the court noted that the Tantri’s responsibilities are strictly limited to ritualistic and ceremonial matters of the temple. The court further clarified that the Tantri does not hold the authority to override the administrative decisions made by the Travancore Devaswom Board, a factor that weighed heavily in the decision to grant him bail.

On investments

A key contention raised by the SIT was that the Tantri and his relatives held unauthorised financial investments. However, the defense countered this by pointing out that the specific investments cited by the SIT dated back to 2006, whereas the alleged gold misappropriation cases occurred much later, in 2019. By highlighting this chronological discrepancy, the defense argued that these financial records could not be linked to the current investigation.

The Vigilance Court also took into account prior High Court rulings which explicitly state that Tantris should not interfere in the administrative affairs of temples. This legal precedent further weakened the SIT’s stance, as it underscores the separation between ritualistic duties and financial management. These observations imply that without concrete evidence linking the Tantri to administrative or financial misconduct, the SIT’s case against him remains on shaky ground.