Dharmasthala case: How activists turned allegations into a campaign against a sacred institution
Total Views |
Few religious institutions in India command the trust, reverence and social goodwill that Dharmasthala does. For centuries, the sacred abode of Lord Manjunatha has stood as a symbol of faith, charity, social harmony and public service. Millions of devotees from across India visit Dharmasthala every year, while its educational, healthcare and rural development initiatives have touched countless lives.
_202606151734505873_H@@IGHT_400_W@@IDTH_600.jpg "Dharmasthal")
However, the story has since taken a dramatic turn.
The very sanitation worker whose allegations formed the basis of the sensational claims has now approached the Karnataka High Court alleging that he was pressured, coached, and manipulated into making false statements against Dharmasthala and its Dharmadhikari, Rajya Sabha MP and social reformer Dr. D. Veerendra Heggade.
In his statement, the petitioner alleged that activist Girish Mattannavar connected him over a phone call with actor Prakash Raj. He claimed that the actor encouraged him to repeat the narrative suggested by Mattannavar before the authorities and assured him of support. The allegations have not been independently verified.
These allegations remain subject to judicial scrutiny. Yet they raise uncomfortable questions.
1. How did such explosive accusations gain nationwide traction before they were properly verified?
2. Why were activists and sections of the media so eager to pronounce guilt before investigations had concluded?
3. Why was a centuries-old religious institution treated as guilty until proven innocent?
The petitioner has further alleged that he was instructed on what to say before authorities, compelled to give statements to YouTubers and subjected to intimidation when he hesitated to support the narrative being crafted around him. According to court filings, he eventually informed investigators that a conspiracy had been hatched to misuse him as a tool against Dharmasthala.
This is where the larger issue emerges.
The damage, meanwhile, is immediate. Faith is questioned. Reputations are destroyed. Institutions built over generations are forced into a defensive posture. Even if allegations later collapse, the stigma often remains.
Dharmasthala is not merely a Hindu temple. It is one of India's most respected centres of philanthropy and community service. Its educational institutions, healthcare facilities, rural development programmes and mass feeding initiatives have served society for decades. Any allegation against such an institution must undoubtedly be investigated. But investigation and vilification are not the same thing.
_202606151736491357_H@@IGHT_400_W@@IDTH_600.jpg "Dharmasthal")
The latest developments also warrant a serious examination of the networks that amplified the allegations. The Karnataka High Court is now hearing petitions that seek action against those allegedly involved in orchestrating and spreading the campaign. Questions have also been raised regarding funding sources and whether external interests played a role in sustaining the agitation. These matters require a thorough and impartial investigation.
What makes the episode particularly troubling is the apparent absence of accountability. When allegations are splashed across headlines, activists demand immediate action. Yet when contradictions emerge, retractions are far less visible. Those who helped spread the accusations rarely display the same enthusiasm in examining evidence that challenges their narrative.
The real test of justice is not merely exposing the guilty. It is also protecting the innocent from calculated defamation disguised as activism.
What led to the SIT probe
The original allegations were made by a former sanitation worker who claimed that:
He had been involved in burying bodies at or around Dharmasthala over a period of years.
There were alleged murders, sexual assaults and suspicious deaths that had been concealed.
Skeletal remains were allegedly buried at various locations.
Influential persons were allegedly involved in covering up crimes.
_202606151737485894_H@@IGHT_400_W@@IDTH_600.jpg "Dharmasthal")
These claims received widespread attention and eventually prompted the Karnataka government to constitute an SIT to investigate. At that stage, the worker was essentially being presented as a whistleblower whose testimony could potentially reveal major crimes.
What happened after the SIT took over?
This is where the narrative appears to have changed dramatically. According to the recent High Court petition and media reports, the same sanitation worker later told investigators and the court that:
He had been pressured and coached by certain activists.
He was allegedly instructed on what statements to make.
He was allegedly made to give interviews and statements to YouTube channels.
He was allegedly promised Rs 50 lakh if he cooperated.
What did the SIT find?
The SIT has not publicly released a final report establishing the original allegations as true.
The petitioner is now asking the High Court to direct the SIT to complete its investigation and file its final report.
The High Court has issued notices and is monitoring aspects of the matter.
At present, no publicly available SIT conclusion confirms:
Mass graves,
Organised murders,
A criminal cover-up by Dharmasthala authorities
Yet over the past year, the institution found itself at the centre of a storm that appeared less like a search for truth and more like a sustained campaign to tarnish its reputation. The controversy began when allegations surfaced regarding alleged mass burials and criminal activities in Dharmasthala. The claims triggered intense media attention, social media outrage, and relentless activism. Headlines were written, videos were produced, and narratives were amplified long before evidence was conclusively established.
However, the story has since taken a dramatic turn.
The very sanitation worker whose allegations formed the basis of the sensational claims has now approached the Karnataka High Court alleging that he was pressured, coached, and manipulated into making false statements against Dharmasthala and its Dharmadhikari, Rajya Sabha MP and social reformer Dr. D. Veerendra Heggade.
According to his petition, he was allegedly promised Rs 50 lakh if he co-operated and helped ensure Heggade's imprisonment. He further alleged that a conspiracy involving activists, YouTubers and others was designed specifically to target Dharmasthala. The petitioner has even claimed that a budget running into hundreds of crores was discussed for executing the plan.
In his statement, the petitioner alleged that activist Girish Mattannavar connected him over a phone call with actor Prakash Raj. He claimed that the actor encouraged him to repeat the narrative suggested by Mattannavar before the authorities and assured him of support. The allegations have not been independently verified.
The petitioner further alleged that Mahesh Shetty Thimarodi spoke of a purported Rs 200-crore plan and offered him Rs 50 lakh if he cooperated with the effort. He claimed that the objective was to implicate Dharmasthala Dharmadhikari Veerendra Heggade. These allegations remain claims made by the petitioner and have not been proven in court.
These allegations remain subject to judicial scrutiny. Yet they raise uncomfortable questions.
1. How did such explosive accusations gain nationwide traction before they were properly verified?
2. Why were activists and sections of the media so eager to pronounce guilt before investigations had concluded?
3. Why was a centuries-old religious institution treated as guilty until proven innocent?
The petitioner has further alleged that he was instructed on what to say before authorities, compelled to give statements to YouTubers and subjected to intimidation when he hesitated to support the narrative being crafted around him. According to court filings, he eventually informed investigators that a conspiracy had been hatched to misuse him as a tool against Dharmasthala.
This is where the larger issue emerges.
Across India, it has become increasingly common for certain activist ecosystems to target Hindu religious institutions through a strategy of allegation first and verification later. Once a charge is made, social media networks, digital influencers and ideological activists amplify it relentlessly. Public perception is shaped long before courts, investigators or forensic experts complete their work.
The damage, meanwhile, is immediate. Faith is questioned. Reputations are destroyed. Institutions built over generations are forced into a defensive posture. Even if allegations later collapse, the stigma often remains.
Dharmasthala is not merely a Hindu temple. It is one of India's most respected centres of philanthropy and community service. Its educational institutions, healthcare facilities, rural development programmes and mass feeding initiatives have served society for decades. Any allegation against such an institution must undoubtedly be investigated. But investigation and vilification are not the same thing.
There have been allegations and suspicions voiced by some political leaders, activists and petitioners that foreign-funded groups or Christian missionary-linked networks may have been involved in the campaign against Dharmasthala and its Trust.
The latest developments also warrant a serious examination of the networks that amplified the allegations. The Karnataka High Court is now hearing petitions that seek action against those allegedly involved in orchestrating and spreading the campaign. Questions have also been raised regarding funding sources and whether external interests played a role in sustaining the agitation. These matters require a thorough and impartial investigation.
What makes the episode particularly troubling is the apparent absence of accountability. When allegations are splashed across headlines, activists demand immediate action. Yet when contradictions emerge, retractions are far less visible. Those who helped spread the accusations rarely display the same enthusiasm in examining evidence that challenges their narrative.
The Dharmasthala episode should therefore serve as a cautionary tale. It highlights the dangers of trial by media, activism driven by ideology rather than evidence, and campaigns that seek to weaken public faith in revered institutions. Truth must prevail, wherever it leads. If wrongdoing exists, it must be punished. But if a sacred institution has been deliberately targeted through fabricated allegations and orchestrated campaigns, those responsible must also face the full force of the law.
The real test of justice is not merely exposing the guilty. It is also protecting the innocent from calculated defamation disguised as activism.
What led to the SIT probe
The original allegations were made by a former sanitation worker who claimed that:
He had been involved in burying bodies at or around Dharmasthala over a period of years.
There were alleged murders, sexual assaults and suspicious deaths that had been concealed.
Skeletal remains were allegedly buried at various locations.
Influential persons were allegedly involved in covering up crimes.
The matter warranted excavation and forensic investigation.
These claims received widespread attention and eventually prompted the Karnataka government to constitute an SIT to investigate. At that stage, the worker was essentially being presented as a whistleblower whose testimony could potentially reveal major crimes.
What happened after the SIT took over?
This is where the narrative appears to have changed dramatically. According to the recent High Court petition and media reports, the same sanitation worker later told investigators and the court that:
He had been pressured and coached by certain activists.
He was allegedly instructed on what statements to make.
He was allegedly made to give interviews and statements to YouTube channels.
He was allegedly promised Rs 50 lakh if he cooperated.
What did the SIT find?
The SIT has not publicly released a final report establishing the original allegations as true.
The petitioner is now asking the High Court to direct the SIT to complete its investigation and file its final report.
The High Court has issued notices and is monitoring aspects of the matter.
At present, no publicly available SIT conclusion confirms:
Mass graves,
Organised murders,
A criminal cover-up by Dharmasthala authorities