Observing that politics should be kept out of the issue of faith and there was nothing prima facie to prove that contaminated ghee was used to make laddus at Tirumala Tirupati temple, Supreme Court slammed Andhra Pradesh CM N Chandrababu Naidu for going public with his allegation of adulterated prasadam without any basis, and hurting the sentiments of millions of devotees.
Hearing a batch of four petitions, including one filed by Subramanian Swamy, a bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan said prasadam was not sent for test and repeatedly asked the state and Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD) to show evidence that contaminated ghee was used for making laddus. The court said according to the report, a sample of rejected ghee was tested.
“There are some disclaimers in the lab report. It is not clear at all. It says that rejected ghee was subjected to the test. If you yourself have ordered an investigation, what was the need to go to the press? The report came in July and the statement was made in Sept. The report says that was not the material used for prasadam,” the bench said at the beginning of the hearing.
It sought answers from the state govt and TTD on how they came to the conclusion that contaminated ghee was used for making prasadam.
Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, appearing for TTD, said the test was conducted after devotees complained about change in taste of prasadam and briefed the court on the sequence of events leading to the controversy.
But the Supreme Court bench again said that when there was no material to show contamination of prasadam, then there could not be any justification for the CM to make comments before an FIR was lodged and an SIT formed. The court said it would also decide whether the probe should be transferred from the state-appointed SIT to an independent agency and would seek the assistance of solicitor general Tushar Mehta on this issue.
“When you have ordered an investigation through the SIT, what was the necessity to go to the press? When you hold a constitutional office, you should maintain some restraint. We expect gods to be kept away from politics,” the bench said.
“We are prima facie of the view that when the investigation was under process, it was not appropriate for the high constitutional authority to make a statement which can affect the sentiments of millions of people. We find that it would be appropriate if the SG assists us on whether the SIT by the state should continue or the investigation should be by an independent agency,” the bench said and posted the hearing to Thursday.
Initiating arguments in the case, senior advocate Rajashekhar Rao, appearing for Swamy, said the CM’s statements were refuted by the executive officer of TTD who said such ghee was never used. He said the ongoing probe should have some kind of supervision.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, for Andhra Pradesh govt, said Swamy’s petition was not bona fide and was filed to espouse the cause of the previous govt led by YSRCP.
