Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Advertise with us Classifieds
search-icon-img
  • ftr-facebook
  • ftr-instagram
  • ftr-instagram
search-icon-img
Advertisement

Isha Foundation row: SC transfers plea to itself

'You cannot let an army or police into an establishment like this,' a three-judge Bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud said, staying the high court’s September 30 order
  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
featured-img featured-img
Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev. PTI file
Advertisement

The Supreme Court on Thursday restrained the Tamil Nadu police from taking any further action against Isha Foundation as it stayed the Madras High Court’s order for a probe against the Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev-run Coimbatore-based organisation.

“You cannot let an army or police into an establishment like this,” a three-judge Bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud said, staying the high court’s September 30 order.

“Police shall not take any further action in pursuance of directions in paragraph 4 of the High Court's order,” the Court ordered.

Advertisement

“With reference to the said allegations, Coimbatore Rural Police having jurisdiction shall conduct an enquiry and file a status report before this court,” ordered the Bench – which also included Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra.

The order came after senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi mentioned the matter for urgent hearing and pointed out that the high court chose to pass such an order on habeas corpus despite the two daughters (aged 42 and 39 years) of the petitioner categorically stating that they were at the Isha foundation on their own will. He also said that a similar petitioner filed by the mother of the two women was dismissed eight years ago.

Advertisement

Contending that hundreds of police officials raided the foundation's ashram and were probing every corner, Rohatgi urged the top court to stay the high court’s order.

“These are issues of religious freedom. This is a very urgent and serious case. This is about Isha Foundation, there is Sadhguru who is very revered and has lakhs of followers. The High Court cannot start such enquiries on oral assertions,” Rohatgi submitted.

On behalf of the Centre, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta supported Isha Foundation’s petition. “The High Court should have been very circumspect. This needs your attention,” Mehta told the Bench.

The Bench virtually interacted with two women whose father -- Dr S Kamaraj -- had filed a habeas corpus petition on which the Madras High Court had passed the impugned order.

Alleging that his daughters were held captive in Isha Foundation, Kamraj sought a direction to the Tamil Nadu police to produce his two daughters.

However, after interacting with Kamraj’s daughters, the top court noted that the two women said they were there at Isha Foundation Coimbatore on their own volition and without any pressure and that they were free to go anywhere.

One of the women said she was being harassed by her father. One of them said she participated in a 10 KM marathon recently.

In its September 30 order, the high court had also ordered the Coimbatore Police to investigate allegations of child abuse -- a POCSO case against a doctor in the institution and other allegations about confinement of persons.

Transferring the case to the Supreme Court, the Bench asked the Tamil Nadu Police to submit its report before it, instead of the high court and posted the matter for further hearing on October 18.

Both the daughters of Kamraj -- a retired professor from the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore – completed their masters in Engineering and joined Isha Foundation which he accused of brainwashing and converting them as monks and not even allowing their parents and relatives to meet them.

Towards the end of the proceedings, senior counsel Siddharth Luthra, on behalf of the Tamil Nadu Government, denied the petitioner’s allegation that police were forcing Ashram residents to give handwritten complaints and said the state police team that visited Isha Foundation was accompanied by health department officials and child welfare committee members.

“We want to know why a person who had given his daughter in marriage and made her settle well in life is encouraging the daughters of others to tonsure their heads and live the life of a hermitess. That is the doubt,” the high court had commented on September 30.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
'
tlbr_img1 Home tlbr_img2 Opinion tlbr_img3 Classifieds tlbr_img4 Videos tlbr_img5 E-Paper