<p>The formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) by the Karnataka government to probe a whistleblower’s grave allegations – rape, murder, and mass burials implicating “influential individuals” in Dharmasthala – has captured national attention. But calls by some legislators for an interim report are premature and counterproductive. </p><p>A case of this magnitude, steeped in decades of history and public sentiment, requires a meticulous, unhurried investigation. The SIT must function independently, free from political interference, to either unearth the truth or lay suspicions to rest. </p><p>For years, a whispering campaign has swirled around the members of the Heggade family, which administers the Manjunatha Swamy Temple. This dissonance reached a flashpoint a decade ago after the rape and murder of a 17-year-old student, Sowjanya. The police investigation was so shoddy that the High Court sharply rebuked the officers. Even after the CBI took over, the culprits were never found. Public anxiety had also spiked with the disappearance of a medical student, Ananya Bhat, in 2003. These episodes left a legacy of unanswered questions.</p>.<p>The whistleblower, a former sanitation worker, claims he was forced to bury hundreds of bodies, many showing signs of sexual violence, between 1995 and 2014. Establishing a firm conclusion from skeletal remains after such a long gap will be daunting. The SIT’s mandate should not be confined to this alone and should cover the wider pattern of allegations. A decade ago, a Kannada news channel reported a series of disappearances of young women from the area – a charge often repeated. The SIT can easily verify this by examining police records. It should also summon YouTubers and local activists who have uploaded over 8,000 links claiming to possess evidence.</p>.<p>This is a tangled web with wheels within wheels. Allegations over questionable property deals and controversies over micro-financing have also surfaced. The fact that the temple is managed by a Jain family is also a sore point for some, but the Supreme Court settled this in 1976, affirming that the temple is a composite institution of the Heggade family, with management vested with the hereditary Dharmadhikari. </p><p>Given the breadth of charges, the SIT’s mission must be comprehensive. This is not just about one sensational claim; it is about a history of similar charges that, if ignored, will continue to erode trust. Whether this is a malicious vilification campaign or a cover-up, the truth must be brought out. The SIT must probe all relevant angles and aim for closure which establishes the truth beyond doubt.</p>
<p>The formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) by the Karnataka government to probe a whistleblower’s grave allegations – rape, murder, and mass burials implicating “influential individuals” in Dharmasthala – has captured national attention. But calls by some legislators for an interim report are premature and counterproductive. </p><p>A case of this magnitude, steeped in decades of history and public sentiment, requires a meticulous, unhurried investigation. The SIT must function independently, free from political interference, to either unearth the truth or lay suspicions to rest. </p><p>For years, a whispering campaign has swirled around the members of the Heggade family, which administers the Manjunatha Swamy Temple. This dissonance reached a flashpoint a decade ago after the rape and murder of a 17-year-old student, Sowjanya. The police investigation was so shoddy that the High Court sharply rebuked the officers. Even after the CBI took over, the culprits were never found. Public anxiety had also spiked with the disappearance of a medical student, Ananya Bhat, in 2003. These episodes left a legacy of unanswered questions.</p>.<p>The whistleblower, a former sanitation worker, claims he was forced to bury hundreds of bodies, many showing signs of sexual violence, between 1995 and 2014. Establishing a firm conclusion from skeletal remains after such a long gap will be daunting. The SIT’s mandate should not be confined to this alone and should cover the wider pattern of allegations. A decade ago, a Kannada news channel reported a series of disappearances of young women from the area – a charge often repeated. The SIT can easily verify this by examining police records. It should also summon YouTubers and local activists who have uploaded over 8,000 links claiming to possess evidence.</p>.<p>This is a tangled web with wheels within wheels. Allegations over questionable property deals and controversies over micro-financing have also surfaced. The fact that the temple is managed by a Jain family is also a sore point for some, but the Supreme Court settled this in 1976, affirming that the temple is a composite institution of the Heggade family, with management vested with the hereditary Dharmadhikari. </p><p>Given the breadth of charges, the SIT’s mission must be comprehensive. This is not just about one sensational claim; it is about a history of similar charges that, if ignored, will continue to erode trust. Whether this is a malicious vilification campaign or a cover-up, the truth must be brought out. The SIT must probe all relevant angles and aim for closure which establishes the truth beyond doubt.</p>
