BJP’s diversionary drama on Dharmasthala

 The series of rapes and murders in Dharmasthala has shaken the conscience of Karnataka, and rightly so. For decades, allegations of sexual violence, mysterious deaths, and institutional cover-ups have hovered like a dark shadow. When the State government finally constituted a Special Investigation Team (SIT), it raised hope that the truth would at last be unearthed. But now, even before the SIT has gathered full momentum, the BJP and Sangh Parivar leaders are orchestrating a diversionary drama designed to derail the probe and protect entrenched interests.

Instead of strengthening the SIT, BJP leaders led by Udupi MP Srinivasa Poojary are pressing for a National Investigation Agency (NIA) inquiry. Their argument? That critics of Dharmasthala are “foreign funded” and therefore pose a national threat. This is a brazenly specious plea. Allegations of rape and murder in a religious seat are not issues of national security; they are issues of law and justice. To bring in the NIA is to stretch logic beyond recognition. But the Sangh parivar knows that once the label of “foreign conspiracy” is affixed, the Centre can invoke the NIA and effectively kill the SIT probe.

This is not about justice. This is about silencing whistleblowers and critics. The BJP leadership is less interested in finding the criminals behind the heinous crimes than in hunting those who expose them — YouTubers, activists, survivors, and independent voices. Branding them as foreign agents is a classic tactic: it demonises dissent, delegitimises the complainant, and shifts focus away from the accused.

The demand for NIA intervention is doubly dangerous because it hands over a state subject to a centrally controlled agency. The SIT, however imperfect, at least retains accountability within Karnataka. If the NIA takes over, all evidence, witness statements, and leads will be transferred to Delhi. What began as a probe into crimes of rape and murder will be buried under the rhetoric of “national interest.” Once nationalised, the case will slip into opaque corridors where the BJP can manipulate findings to suit its narrative.

This outcome could have been avoided had the State government listened to voices urging judicial oversight. Appointing a sitting High Court or Supreme Court judge to monitor the SIT would have insulated the probe from political meddling. It would have reassured the public that the investigation would not be strangled midway. By failing to do so, the government has left the SIT vulnerable to central sabotage.

The larger game is obvious: the BJP national leadership has a stake in shielding Dharmasthala. Local leaders are merely executing a script handed down from Delhi. The fear is not just exposure of individual crimes, but exposure of an ecosystem — of unholy alliances between religious authority, political power, and Sangh support. That, more than anything else, is what the BJP wants to prevent.

The victims of Dharmasthala deserve justice, not diversion. If the Centre succeeds in wresting the case away from the SIT, it will not be an act of truth-seeking but of truth-burying. The people of Karnataka, and indeed the country, must not be so naïve as to accept the fiction of “foreign funding.” What is at stake is not national security but the integrity of our justice system.

………….

SIT vs NIA

Special Investigation Team (SIT)

  • Jurisdiction: State-level, appointed by the government.
  • Mandate: Handles serious crimes such as rape, murder, corruption, and organised crime.
  • Accountability: Functions under state police laws; can be monitored by High Court/Supreme Court.
  • Transparency: Local media and courts can scrutinise its work.
  • Risk: Vulnerable to state-level political pressure, unless judicially monitored.

National Investigation Agency (NIA)

  • Jurisdiction: National, controlled by Union Home Ministry.
  • Mandate: Terrorism, cross-border crimes, national security threats.
  • Accountability: Reports to the Centre, not the state.
  • Transparency: Highly opaque; findings often aligned with Centre’s political narrative.
  • Risk: Can override state probes; scope of inquiry can be widened to target whistleblowers or activists.

…………………

  • 👉 Bottom Line:
    The Dharmasthala case is about heinous crimes of rape and murder, not terrorism.
    An SIT under judicial monitoring can deliver justice.
    An NIA probe on the plea of “foreign funding” risks burying the truth and shielding the powerful.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Karnataka Bank’s Course Correction: From Bureaucratic Blunder To Restoring Trust With Homegrown Leadership

Image
Karnataka Bank, one of India’s oldest and most respected private sector banks, has always been more than just a financial institution—it has been a people’s bank in the truest sense. Founded over a century ago in the heart of Karnataka’s coastal belt, the bank earned its reputation not through flashy campaigns or overnight growth, but through quiet, consistent service to small account holders, agriculturists, local traders, and slowly, to corporates. It grew because it was trusted. And that trust was cultivated by the fact that the people managing the bank were those who grew within it—rooted in its culture, ethos, and mission. For decades, even after the appointment of senior executives formally became the RBI’s prerogative, there was unwritten mutual respect between the Reserve Bank and Karnataka Bank’s Board and shareholders. The RBI honoured the sentiment that only insiders—those who understood the pulse of the institution and its customers—should lead the bank. This symbiosis work...
Read more

When Prestige Is Gifted, Not Earned: The Padma Vibhushan Controversy Of Veerendra Heggade

Image
When a nation’s second-highest civilian honour— the Padma Vibhushan —is handed out without traceable deliberations or public accountability, the integrity of the entire award system comes under question. That is exactly what has happened in the case of     D. Veerendra Heggade , the Dharmasthala hereditary administrator whose 2015 Padma Vibhushan award now appears to be the product of    unrecorded decision-making . This is not mere speculation. The evidence stems from a detailed RTI application filed by  Ranjan Rao Yerdoor , a citizen activist from Guruvayur of Dakshina Kannada, Karnataka, who sought documents from the Union Home Ministry regarding the nomination, recommendation, and selection process that led to Heggade being chosen for Padma Vibhushan award. The response he received was staggering: the government  admitted that no minutes of the Padma Awards Committee meeting were maintained , and  no records of the nomination were available ...
Read more

Why I Will Never Fly Air India Again

Image
By a former passenger and complainant at the Consumer Court The recent  Air India tragedy near Ahmedabad , claiming nearly  300 lives , has shaken the nation’s conscience. For many, it’s a horrific reminder of how fragile air safety still is, even after decades of supposed progress. For me, it reopens an old wound — one that never healed — and forces me to ask again: has anything really changed at Air India? It is easy to grieve in silence, to watch headlines scroll across the screen, and then move on. But when you’ve lived through a traumatic experience with the same airline, the grief cuts deeper. The Ahmedabad crash wasn’t just an accident — it was a culmination of operational negligence, poor maintenance, and an organisational culture that seems to treat passenger safety as a secondary concern. Several years ago, I flew Air India from  Chicago to Mumbai  — a journey that turned into a 30-hour nightmare. The  air conditioning system failed  midair, and t...
Read more