No need for vigilance probe into Jaimala's Sabarimala entry

Kochi, Oct 5 (UNI) The Kerala High Court today rejected the plea for a vigilance probe into the alleged entry of Kannada actress Jaimala into the sanctum sanctorum of the Sabarimala temple 18 years ago.

A Division Bench consisting of Chief Justice V K Bali and Justice M Ramachandran also rejected the plea for a fresh 'devaprasanam' at the temple, holding that the earlier 'devaprasanam' conducted by the Travancore Devaswom Board could not be characterised as irregular.

On the plea for a vigilance inquiry into 'devaprasanam' findings that a woman entered the sanctum at Sabarimala and touched the idol, the court said 'we also do not recommend any vigilance proceedings to be initiated on the reported matter as rectification measures could be resorted to by the (Travancore Devaswom) Board even otherwise.' The bench rejected the suggestion that a high-power body be formed for administering the temple, holding that nothing had been shown to indicate there was insufficiency in administration of the temple.

Rejecting the plea for a fresh 'devaprasanam', the court said it would have been possible for the Devaswom Board to carry out the 'devaprasnam' since a valid requsition had come before it.

The procedural steps taken for its conduct could not be called irregular. 'This automatically leads to a situation that there is no necessity for a fresh ''devaprasnam'',' the court held.

A 'devaprasanam' conducted at the hill shrine a few months ago by famous astrologer P Unnikrishnan Pannickar had revealed several 'irregularities' in the functioning of the temple, including that a woman had entered the sanctum sanctorum of Sabarimala. Women between 10 to 50 years are barred from entering the place.

Kannada actress Jaimala later confessed that she had entered the sanctum and touched the idol of Lord Ayyappa 18 years ago.

The court orders came on six petitions filed by separate parties, including astrologer Jayakumar, Pandalam Palace and the Yogakshema Sabha. The main relief sought was holding a fresh 'devaprasanam' at Sabarimala and a vigilance inquiry into the alleged entry of a woman.

The Court also noted from the records submitted by the Devaswom Board that the 'devaprasnam' was initiated at the instance of the Sabarimala tantri and that the formal consent of the Pandalam Raja was not essential for the conduct of the ritual.

The court felt the tantri's role in all these matters should be more closely examined, as to whether he wielded supreme power.

On the question of whether the ornaments adorning the deity be kept with the Pandalam Raja or in the government treasury, the court said these had to be kept in the hands of the Pandalam Raja.

UNI XR ARC PA BST1614