Kochi, March 17 The Kerala High Court on Tuesday stayed the observations made by a vigilance court regarding the allegations and SIT investigation against the tantri (chief priest), Kandararu Rajeevaru, in the Sabarimala gold loss cases.
The order by Justice A Badharudeen came in response to an appeal by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) seeking to overturn the bail granted to the tantri and to quash the vigilance court's observations while granting relief to Rajeevaru.
The High Court also issued a notice to the Tantri, seeking his response to the SIT's appeal.
The Director General of Prosecution, T A Shaji, confirmed the order.
The SIT, in its appeal, filed through additional public prosecutor P Narayanan, has claimed that the relief granted to Rajeevaru has resulted in a "grave miscarriage of justice".
The Court of Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge (Vigilance), Kollam, had on February 18 granted bail to the Tantri, observing that there was "no evidence" against him in the cases related to the alleged loss of gold from temple artefacts.
The SIT is investigating the alleged misappropriation of gold from the Dwarapalaka (guardian deity) idols and the door frames of the Sreekovil (sanctum sanctorum) of the temple.
Rajeevaru is the 16th accused in the Dwarapalaka case, and the 13th accused in the Sreekovil case, and the vigilance court had granted him bail in both cases.
The SIT has challenged the bail granted to the tantri in the Dwarapalaka case.
The SIT has claimed that the "unwarranted and unnecessary observations" by the special court will also interfere with the ongoing investigation.
In its plea, the SIT has further claimed that the opinion submitted by the Tantri formed the basis for the decision of the Travancore Devaswom Board (TDB) to hand over the artefacts to Potty.
The vigilance court had observed that the SIT's case regarding criminal conspiracy fails because the petitioner did not sign the crucial mahazar dated July 20, 2019.
It had also said that the mere signing of the first mahazar dated July 19, 2019, in the absence of any other incriminating circumstances, is not a ground to implicate the petitioner at this stage, especially since the mahazar was prepared pursuant to a formal decision of the Board.
The SIT, in its plea, has claimed that Rajeevaru "purposefully abstained" from signing the subsequent mahazar dated July 20, 2019, though he was present at the Sannidhanam, "thereby attempting to avoid direct traceability while still facilitating the illegal entrustment and transportation of the sacred artefacts outside the temple premises".
It has also contended that the Tantri was physically present at the Sannidhanam on July 19, 2019, when the first mahazar was prepared, and that he signed the document in which the gold-cladded artefacts were falsely described as mere copper plates, allowing them to be taken out of the temple premises.
