Dharmasthala case explained: The latest findings and unanswered questions | 172 | Pooja Prasanna

A lot has happened since we last spoke about the Dharmasthala case. And because we’ve been following this story closely and reporting on it through all these developments, I thought it was time we sat down and made sense of where things stand.  Last year, the focus was on Chinnaiah - the masked man who came forward with massive claims about mass burials in and around Dharmasthala.But that story eventually fell apart.The state government constituted a Special Investigation Team, or SIT, to investigate his allegations. But instead of the hundreds of bodies that Chinnaiah had initially claimed he had buried, the excavations unearthed just two skeletons- both male.Chinnaiah subsequently changed his version. He was arrested, and the SIT initiated perjury proceedings against him. He has also alleged that he was forced by a few people to make these claims and they were also booked by  the police.But now, there are new developments.The Karnataka State Women’s Commission has written to the state government asking for the SIT’s mandate to be expanded.Why? Because the SIT in its status report to the Commission points at discrepancies in records relating to Unnatural Death Reports, or UDRs. The SIT also found remains of 7 people at a location called Banglegudde.  Then there has been another major development: the Supreme Court has ordered a fresh investigation into the 2012 rape and murder of 17-year-old Sowjanya.So, what exactly are all these developments?Let Me ExplainJournalism is not just about breaking stories and moving on. It is questioning what comes next, and refusing to let uncomfortable questions disappear.  In Dharmasthala, the story has taken several turns, but questions about the records and the investigations remain.So we have returned to examine what has changed, what we know now, and what remains unanswered.Follow-ups take time, reporting and resources.Support TNM to help us keep doing this work.Like LME? Support the show: https://rzp.io/rzp/support-lmeLike our journalism? Become a subscriber: https://www.thenewsminute.com/subscriptionWhat does the SIT’s status report to the Women’s Commission actually say?Let’s start with the Unnatural Death Reports.An Unnatural Death Report is an official record prepared by the police when a death appears unnatural, suspicious, or is not clearly attributable to natural causes.According to the SIT material, records from different sources do not completely match.Between 1998 and 2014, the records collected by the police showed 1,480 UDR cases.But records obtained from the State Crime Records Bureau and panchayat sources showed 1,510 cases.That is a difference of 30 cases.It means there are 30 cases for which the records from these sources don't match.The biggest discrepancy was in 2001.Belthangady Police Station records showed 90 unnatural deaths, while SCRB and panchayat records showed 95.The SIT report, at least in the material available to us, does not give more details- whether those who died were men or women, what their ages were, how they died, or whether any of these discrepancies point to any sort of criminal activity.The SIT has however made it clear that these cases are worth reexamining. It cites one specific caseUDR No. 69 of 2003.In that case, the bodies of an unidentified man, estimated to be between 35 and 45 years old, and a minor girl, estimated to be between 10 and 12, were found in the Netravati river near the vented dam.The police records and the panchayat's burial records apparently do not match.The SIT says this discrepancy is being examined.Now, let’s move on to Banglegudde.This location became important because of a skull that Chinnaih first carried along with him.The SIT's investigation found that Chinnaiah had not actually excavated that skull himself. Instead it was handed over to him by other local residents. This investigation led the SIT to Banglegudde- Banglagudde is a hillock surrounded by forest cover near the Netravati river bathing ghats in Dharmasthala. The river lies on one side, with forest cover on the other.As Banglagudde falls within a reserve forest area, bodies cannot legally be buried there. When the SIT excavated the site, they recovered seven human skulls and additional skeletal remains.Many have reported that forensic teams documented a baffling detail at Banglegudde: an ulna bone inserted directly into one of the recovered skulls.The DNA analysis has in fact found that the skeletal remains belong to at least 9 distinct individuals- 8 males and 1 female.The SIT has matched the DNA of 3 out 7 skulls recovered. One was of UB Ayyappa, a 70-year-old man from Kodagu district who went missing in June 2017, another of Adishesha Narayana, a 27-year old from Tumakuru district who went missing in October 2013 and finally 85 year old Krishnappa from Kolar district who went missing in October 2024.The crucial questions now are: Who did the rest of the remains belong to? How did they die? And how did these bodies end up at the hillock?Those answers depend on further investigation, forensic and DNA analysis. The SIT has told the women’s commission that they don’t have the mandate to investigate this. so now to the next question. What has the Women's Commission asked for?The Karnataka State Women's Commission has asked the government to expand the SIT's mandate.The Commission says the discrepancies involving the 30 UDR cases, the 2003 case, and the human remains recovered at Banglegudde need to be properly investigated.It has asked the government to formally transfer these cases to the SIT and expand its terms of reference if necessary.This is important because the SIT itself has said it cannot simply start investigating every old case on its own initiative.According to the SIT's position, if the government transfers these cases to it and formally orders an investigation, then the team can take them up. And this brings us to perhaps the most significant parallel development.The Supreme Court has now ordered a de novo investigation into the rape and murder of 17-year-old Sowjanya in 2012.Sowjanya's case had already been investigated by the local police, the Karnataka CID and later the CBI. A man named Santhosh Rao was first prosecuted, but he was acquitted in 2023.The Supreme Court has said that there were serious lapses in the earlier investigation  The Court noted that the state located eight potential witnesses identified by Sowjanya’s family within three weeks of being ordered to protect them.The Supreme Court questioned why these leads had not been properly investigated earlier. An expert had testified that hairs belonging to people other than Santhosh Rao were found on Sowjanya's clothing. The Court noted that, if suspicious persons are identified, their DNA could still be compared with that material.After this SC order, the Karnataka govt formed an SIT in September 2026 and it is being headed by IGP N. Shashi Kumar.And let’s not forget- The fresh investigation is about identifying who was actually responsible for Sowjanya's murder - not reopening Santosh Rao's prosecution.Now to look at what happened to Chinnaiah’s story Chinnaiah originally claimed that he had buried hundreds of bodies in Dharmasthala, many of them women and girls who had allegedly been sexually assaulted. An allegation that he repeated to many media houses, including us.The SIT excavated locations based on his statements.But after the excavations found almost nothing, Chinnaiah changed his account.He went from claiming hundreds of burials to saying that he had buried ten bodies.The SIT subsequently arrested him and initiated perjury proceedings.The investigation also found that the skull Chinnaih produced as evidence had been passed on to himChinnaiah has since alleged that he was persuaded, coached and pressured by activists and associates to make false allegations.Based on these allegations, the SIT has filed a chargesheet against six individuals and that case is ongoing.This is an important case to follow as questions around Dharmasthala had been around for decades, but why did this individual make such exaggerated claims?The Shri Kshetra Dharmasthala temple has filed an application in court seeking permission to implead in this case as the temple says it must be considered a victim.Other than the cases on Chinnaiah, there are multiple cases going on in courts even as we speakAnother is a petition filed by Kusumavathi, the mother of Sowjanya, in the Karnataka High Court.Her petition raises questions about 74 people who were found dead in Dharmasthala between 1990 and 2021.According to the petition, most of these bodies were buried on the same day they were discovered. The petition alleges that mandatory procedures for investigating unnatural deaths were not followed.She asks why people who allegedly died in lodges and guesthouses were classified as unidentified, despite these establishments being required to maintain guest records. The legal battles continue and the demands by the women’s commission have to be addressed by the govt. We will keep following these updates. Follow them on The News Minute. Like LME? Support the show: https://rzp.io/rzp/support-lmeLike our journalism? Become a subscriber: https://www.thenewsminute.com/subscriptionProduced by Megha Mukundan, script by Dhanya Rajendran, Shivani Kava, camera by Ajay R, edit by Nikhil Sekhar ET