Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram
Karnataka Police register new FIR against Muruga Mutt seer for sexual abuse of children
A special Pocso court in Chitradurga last month rejected the bail pleas of the seer and the hostel warden.

The Karnataka Police have registered a new first information report (FIR) against Shivamurthy Muruga Sharanaru, 64, the head pontiff of the Murugarajendra Mutt in Chitradurga under the Protection of Children against Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act on the basis of a complaint filed by a woman who worked at the Mutt.
According to the complaint, the seer allegedly assaulted the two children of the woman who were staying at a hostel run by the Mutt. The FIR has named seven persons, including the warden of the hostel Rashmi S, 26.
The seer was arrested on September 1 in connection with an FIR filed by the police on the basis of a complaint filed on August 26 by a child protection officer on behalf of two girls who left a hostel run by the mutt in July this year over alleged harassment by the seer and the hostel warden.
On September 22, a special Pocso court in Chitradurga rejected the bail pleas of the seer and the hostel warden in the FIR filed on August 26.
In the course of the hearing of the case, the court was informed by a special public prosecutor that the seer may have committed similar crimes against other inmates of the hostel attached to the Mutt and that granting bail to the seer could impede investigations.
“The objections of learned Public Prosecutor that petitioner being Peetadhipathi (head) of Mutt is politically, socially, financially powerful is to be considered seriously and cannot be brushed aside, that too considering the facts and circumstances of the case…,” special court judge B K Komala said.
“In the objections of the learned Special Public Prosecutor and also in the remand application it has been noted that, there are allegations that the petitioner (seer) has committed similar offences against other inmates of the hostel and a detailed investigation has to be conducted in this regard,” the special court noted in a September 22 order.
The warden “by willful misrepresentation was sending the victims to the private room of the accused No.1 with a view to facilitate the accused No.1 to commit the offence of sexual assault upon them. Therefore, the ingredients as contemplated under Section 16 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act are prima facie made out,” the special court said while rejecting the warden’s bail plea.