The Karnataka High Court on Thursday gave freedom for the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) to interrogate Raghaveshwara Bharathi Swami of Sri Ramachandrapura Math in a criminal case registered against him on the allegation that he had on several occasions sexually harassed and raped a 47-year-old singer, who was a devotee of the math.
Justice K.N. Phaneendra, while dismissing the seer’s petition questioning the first information report (FIR) registered against him, said the FIR cannot be quashed at this early stage as the status and reputation of not only the seer but also the woman were at stake. He said that only a “fair and efficient” investigation could ascertain whether the allegations levelled against the seer were false or true.
The court hoped that the CID would conduct a “fair, impartial, meticulous and efficient investigation”. Though the High Court vacated its interim order of restraining the police from interrogating or arresting the seer, in its Thursday’s order it reminded the police that the discretionary power of investigating officers to arrest an accused should be used “with all care and caution depending on facts and circumstance of each case” and both the accused and the complainants should be given equal opportunity to support their claims.
Anticipatory bailLater in the day, a City Civil and Sessions Court here granted an interim anticipatory bail to the seer for a period of 30 days on the condition that the police should release him on bail in the event of his arrest. The trial court directed the seer not to tamper with or threaten witnesses while imposing other conditions.
The city police, on August 28, registered a case of sexual harassment against the 39-year-old seer based on a complaint filed by the woman’s daughter alleging that her mother was sexually exploited by the seer. The woman, after she was arrested along with her husband on the allegation that they had blackmailed the seer and the math, gave a detailed statement to the police accusing the seer of raping her for more than 90 times at 40 places across the country between 2010 and 2014.
On the contention of the seer that the allegations were “concocted” and the complaint was at the behest of “unknown persons” who wanted to tarnish his reputation and extort money, the High Court said any nexus of the woman and her husband with those “unknown persons” could be established only through a thorough investigation.
