Justice for Premananda

Since Swami Premananda’s arrest and imprisonment there have been a number of attempts to charge well-known spiritual leaders and to discredit their ashrams in South India. The following is an extract from the article “Supreme Court Criticizes Tamil Nadu Handling of Sankaracharya's Case”. This article is also of particular interest for the case against Swami Premananda, because of the seemingly politically motivated parallels.

Supreme Court Criticizes Tamil Nadu Handling of Sankaracharya's Case

NEW DELHI, INDIA, October 26, 2005: Shifting the Sankararaman murder case to Pondicherry, the Supreme Court today observed that there was a case for "reasonable apprehension" that the accused will not get justice in Tamil Nadu. A Bench comprising Chief Justice R. C. Lahoti and Justice G. P. Mathur also felt that the Tamil Nadu government was showing "interest in securing the conviction of the seer and halting the religious activities of the Kanchi mutt."

The apex court criticized the prosecuting agencies for showing "extra interest" in the case only on the ground that the Sankaracharya, who has been chargesheeted in the case for allegedly entering into conspiracy to murder, is the head of the mutt. "It leads to an inference that state machinery is not only interested in securing conviction of the petitioner (seer) and other co-accused but also bringing to a complete halt the entire religious and other activities of the various trusts and endowments and the performance of pooja and other rituals in the temples and religious places in accordance with the customs and traditions and thereby create a fear psychosis in the minds of the people," the court observed.

The court said the action of freezing the accounts of the mutt demonstrates as to what extent the state machinery can go while prosecuting the seer in the Sankararaman murder case. "The freezing of all the accounts of the mutt and its associated trusts and endowments is a clear pointer to the fact that the state machinery anyhow wants to paralyse the entire working of the mutt and the associate trusts and endowments in order to put pressure upon the seer and other co-accused who are in the manner connected with the mutt so that they may not able to defend themselves," it said.

Justice Mathur ... said the materials placed on record satisfies that various hurdles have been created by the state machinery in the case for the accused persons and criticized the prosecuting agencies for targeting the counsel, including senior advocates, who stood for the defence of the acharya. "From the material placed before us, we are prima facie satisfied that a situation has arisen in the present case wherein the lawyers engaged by the petitioner and other co-accused cannot perform their professional duty in a proper and dignified manner on account of various hurdles created by the state machinery... The court took strong exception to the Tamil Nadu government's attempt to "stifle even publication of any article or expression of dissent in media or press, interviews by journalists or persons who have held high positions in public life and are wholly unconnected with the criminal case."