Kochi: The Kerala High Court on Thursday refused anticipatory bail to two former Travancore Devaswom Board (TDB) officials accused in connection with the alleged misappropriation of gold from the Sabarimala temple. Justice A Badharudeen, presiding over the case, held that the allegations against the accused were prima facie established and that granting pre-arrest bail could jeopardize the ongoing investigation into one of the state’s most high-profile temple gold scams.

The officials whose bail pleas were rejected are S Sreekumar, former administrative officer of the TDB, and S Jayasree, former secretary of the Board. Both have been named in cases relating to irregularities in the gold plating of artefacts in the Lord Ayyappa shrine. The court noted that if the two accused were granted anticipatory bail, the investigation could collapse, rendering the probe ineffective.

Court’s Observations on the Alleged Scam

Justice Badharudeen expressed shock over the alleged misappropriation of gold from a sacred place like Sabarimala and hinted at the involvement of senior figures or “big guns” within the temple administration and the Board. Referring to prosecution records, the court observed that the prime accused, Unnikrishnan Potty, “enjoyed unbridled freedom to devour the valuable gold of the holy deity,” suggesting that such large-scale misappropriation could not have occurred without higher-level complicity.

The court stressed that the investigation should continue thoroughly to identify all individuals involved, leaving no room for escape, given the gravity of the allegations. “The allegations are very serious, as already observed,” it stated, emphasizing that the probe must bring all culprits to justice.

Details of the Gold Plating Irregularities

According to the court, the plates of the Dwarapalaka idols and other artefacts in the temple were originally gold-clad. Therefore, the process of gold plating was unnecessary, and the attempt to classify these artefacts as requiring plating facilitated the misappropriation of the original gold. The court noted that the conspirators were aware that recording the Dwarapalaka plates as made of copper, instead of acknowledging their gold-clad nature, would enable them to divert gold for illegal enrichment.

Justice Badharudeen specifically highlighted that both Sreekumar and Jayasree knew the plates were gold-clad but nevertheless signed official documents stating they were made of copper. “Thus, prima facie, the conspiracy is of the widest magnitude, involving other higher officials beyond the accused persons currently arrayed,” the court noted. It added that without the involvement of senior officials, such a large-scale misappropriation from a highly revered temple could not have occurred.

Board Decisions and Evidence of Deceit

The court also pointed to the Board’s decision, which described the plates as copper, as indicative of deceitful intention and a mechanism for misappropriating gold. The decision, dated July 3, 2019, suggested the involvement of Board members in the misstatement and further showed that the decision-makers facilitated the unlawful enrichment of perpetrators at the expense of both the TDB and Lord Ayyappa’s temple assets.

In light of these findings, the court ordered that the ongoing investigation be expanded to include other individuals involved in the scam. It directed authorities to trace senior officials and individuals who had “control, connection, and constant contact” with the prime accused, Unnikrishnan Potty.

Assessment of the Roles of Sreekumar and Jayasree

Justice Badharudeen specifically addressed the role of Jayasree, stating that if she were not part of the conspiracy, she should have informed the Board that the plates were actually gold-clad. Instead, within two days, she issued an order deviating from the Board’s original decision to hand over the Dwarapalaka plates to the first accused for gold plating. Based on this conduct, the court concluded that her involvement was prima facie established and denied her bail, including on medical grounds, despite her having undergone a kidney transplant. The Special Investigation Team (SIT) was noted to be ready to provide medical assistance as needed.

Similarly, Sreekumar was found to have signed the mahazar classifying gold-clad plates as copper, thereby attracting charges of corruption. The court emphasized that both petitioners, holding key positions in the TDB, could potentially influence witnesses, tamper with evidence, or cause destruction or disappearance of documents if released on anticipatory bail.

Orders and Cooperation with the Probe

The Kerala High Court directed Sreekumar and Jayasree to surrender before the investigating officer and fully cooperate with the ongoing probe. The SIT, appointed by the court, continues to investigate the loss of gold from the Dwarapalaka idols and the Sreekovil door frames.

To date, six individuals, including prime accused Unnikrishnan Potty and former TDB presidents N Vasu and A Padmakumar, have been arrested in connection with two separate cases linked to the gold misappropriation. The investigation has been described as methodical and ongoing, with the court stressing the need to uncover all individuals involved, especially those holding senior positions within the Board.

Significance of the Case

The Sabarimala gold loss case has drawn widespread public attention due to the sacred nature of the temple, which is visited by lakhs of devotees annually, and the scale of the alleged financial irregularities. The case not only highlights the mismanagement of temple assets but also raises questions about the oversight mechanisms within religious and administrative institutions.

The High Court’s decision to deny anticipatory bail underscores the seriousness with which judicial authorities view corruption cases, particularly when they involve religious institutions and public trust. The ruling also reflects the judiciary’s intent to ensure that investigations proceed unhindered and that all individuals responsible for misappropriation, including senior figures, are held accountable.

Conclusion

In summary, the Kerala High Court has firmly rejected anticipatory bail applications by former TDB officials S Sreekumar and S Jayasree, emphasizing the prima facie evidence against them and the risk of compromising the investigation. The court’s detailed observations on the alleged conspiracy, the involvement of higher officials, and the mechanics of the gold misappropriation highlight the depth and seriousness of the case.

The SIT will continue its investigation into the Sabarimala gold loss, with the court’s directive ensuring that all leads, including potential senior-level complicity, are pursued rigorously. The verdict sends a clear signal that judicial authorities are committed to upholding the integrity of temple administration and ensuring accountability in cases of corruption involving sacred institutions and public resources.

---