<p>The Investigating Officers (IO) submitted an extract of the CD along with an affidavit pertaining to the progress of the investigation during the hearing of a petition by Nithyananda seeking to quash the FIR against him at Ramanagara Police Station. In the affidavit, the Investigating Officers have submitted that certain new evidence have come into light wherein a devotee of Nithyananda has complained about being sexually abused by him.<br /><br />In a statement said to have been recorded between August 16 and August 17, the IOs have said that the devotee’s has stated that she was victimised by Nithyananda under the guise of ‘enlightening’ her.<br /><br />The affidavit also points to several details, revealed by many devotees, whom the petitioner had victimised in the name of religion. The CID said that the petitioner has got 10 non-disclosure agreements signed by some of the devotees.<br /><br />“Consent of these persons was fraudulently obtained by the petitioner for Tantrik sex and for being exposed to obscenity. These materials collected clearly shows the act of deception on the part of the petitioner,” the affidavit said.<br /><br />The affidavit also mentions that complainant Lenin on September 16, 2010 had produced a CD containing audio recording of the telephonic conversation and an email message, where Nithyananda had sought Lenin’s forgiveness, assuring him full protection and safety.<br /><br />The CD with the alleged video clipping involving Nithyananda has also been sent to Forensic Science Laboratory. The report is awaited. Mentioning that the investigation is still under progress, the affidavit mentioned about the two witness Ma Nityananada Gopika and Nitya Vimalananda residing in USA. <br /><br />The affidavit also stated that the CID had written to Ma Nityananda Gopika to appear before the IO. Mentioning that the probe is being conducted fair and impartial manner, the IO has sought sufficient time for completion of the investigation.<br /><br />Counsel for the petitioner in his submission termed the submission as baseless and sought it to be dismissed. The matter is adjourned.</p>
<p>The Investigating Officers (IO) submitted an extract of the CD along with an affidavit pertaining to the progress of the investigation during the hearing of a petition by Nithyananda seeking to quash the FIR against him at Ramanagara Police Station. In the affidavit, the Investigating Officers have submitted that certain new evidence have come into light wherein a devotee of Nithyananda has complained about being sexually abused by him.<br /><br />In a statement said to have been recorded between August 16 and August 17, the IOs have said that the devotee’s has stated that she was victimised by Nithyananda under the guise of ‘enlightening’ her.<br /><br />The affidavit also points to several details, revealed by many devotees, whom the petitioner had victimised in the name of religion. The CID said that the petitioner has got 10 non-disclosure agreements signed by some of the devotees.<br /><br />“Consent of these persons was fraudulently obtained by the petitioner for Tantrik sex and for being exposed to obscenity. These materials collected clearly shows the act of deception on the part of the petitioner,” the affidavit said.<br /><br />The affidavit also mentions that complainant Lenin on September 16, 2010 had produced a CD containing audio recording of the telephonic conversation and an email message, where Nithyananda had sought Lenin’s forgiveness, assuring him full protection and safety.<br /><br />The CD with the alleged video clipping involving Nithyananda has also been sent to Forensic Science Laboratory. The report is awaited. Mentioning that the investigation is still under progress, the affidavit mentioned about the two witness Ma Nityananada Gopika and Nitya Vimalananda residing in USA. <br /><br />The affidavit also stated that the CID had written to Ma Nityananda Gopika to appear before the IO. Mentioning that the probe is being conducted fair and impartial manner, the IO has sought sufficient time for completion of the investigation.<br /><br />Counsel for the petitioner in his submission termed the submission as baseless and sought it to be dismissed. The matter is adjourned.</p>
