Verdict reserved in Nithyananda case

February 28, 2018 01:30 am | Updated 01:31 am IST - CHENNAI

The Madras High Court on Tuesday reserved its verdict on a writ petition seeking a direction to the State government as well as the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) department to prevent self-styled godman Nithyananda from interfering with the affairs of the Madurai Aadheenam besides initiating appropriate action against him.

Justice R. Mahadevan said that he would deliver his judgment on Monday. Advocate S.C. Herold Singh, representing the petitioner M. Jagathalapradapan, a follower of the Aadheenam, and Senior Counsel A. Raghunathan appearing on behalf of Nithyananda wrapped up their oral arguments on Tuesday. The latter also filed written submissions.

During the course of the arguments, the judge said that he would close the writ petition if Nithyananda was willing to file an affidavit stating that he would not enter the Aadheenam until the disposal of civil suits related to his annointment as the junior pontiff and subsequent removal from the post were decided by a lower court in Madurai.

However, the senior counsel did not respond positively to the offer and went on to state that his client was very much concerned about non conduct of certain pujas (prayers) in the Aadheenam. When the judge said that the court could appoint othuvars (priests) to perform the pujas , he said that Nithyananda wanted to perform them personally.

Thereafter, he went on to argue the case on merits and after completing the submissions, he requested the court to provide him time to get instructions from Nithyananda on filing an affidavit as suggested by the court. However, this time, the judge rejected such a request and said that the plea could not be acceded to after hearing the case at length.

Expressing disappointment over some of the Aadheenams in the State being bothered about the properties and wealth attached to the Mutts, the judge said that it was time for the State to regulate such people. “There was also an Aadheenam who did not have an Aadheenam at all. He renounced his own Aadheenam. He was the great Pattinathar,” the judge told the lawyers.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.