Author: Ramesh Rao
Publication: www.sulekha.com
Date: November 13, 2004
URL: http://www.sulekha.com/expressions/articlecomments.asp?cid=307424
Life is indeed stranger than fiction.
One accusation of a murder has made the supreme seer of the Kanchi Kamakoti
Peetham a villain, while those who have lead men to murder in the thousands
are proclaimed heroes -- to paraphrase Beilby Porteus, the eighteenth century
evangelist and abolitionist.
The arrest of the Kanchi seer has
become a reason for celebration and triumphalism for the Brahmin haters
of Tamil Nadu, led by a writer of tawdry dramas, whose men tried to disrobe
the actress who became Chief Minister, and who in turn arrested at midnight
the writer of those tawdry dramas when she became Chief Minister. While
the VHP, the RSS and the Hindu Dharma Acharya Sabha are dumbfounded by
this event and have made sundry calls for bandhs, gheraos, and protests,
the internet is abuzz with talk of "Hinduism is under attack". Conspiracy
theories abound, and I get back channel information from someone who heard
from someone else about the Kanchi seer being this and that, or that it
is a Marxist- Christian-Muslim plot to defeat Hinduism in India.
It is indeed strange that the Acharya
was arrested as he was, without his ability to consult with a lawyer, and
while he was in Hyderabad performing a pooja. He would have fled to Nepal,
the demagogic Chennai public prosecutor asserts, and proclaims the Seer
an "undeserved criminal". Even as we are struck by the shrillness of the
public prosecutor's indictment, we wonder why Jayalalithaa is silent about
this whole drama. Isn't she still the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu? Does
she fear that if she doesn't incarcerate Jayendra Saraswati, his life itself
might be endangered? Does she fear that there is an organized attempt to
dismiss her government using this case as an excuse? The vernacular press
reported that Karunanidhi had threatened to fast in Kanchipuram if Jayendra
Saraswati was not arrested. Earlier, Nakkeeran, a magazine with DMK leanings
also published the purported evidential letters from Sankararaman. How
did Karunanidhi get access to so much police data? Does he stand to gain
the most from the murder of Sankararaman and by implicating Jayendra Saraswati?
It is amazing that all kinds of
politicians - at the local and at the national level -- and well-connected
bureaucrats, businessmen, and others get away with murder indeed, and never
see the inside of a police station let alone a prison and here we have
the Kanchi seer arrested and lodged in Vellore Central Prison, without
any proof that he was the one who either ordered the murder or countenanced
it. Yes, indeed these are strange times. What was the need to arrest him,
and worse yet put him in prison, when he could simply have been served
orders to appear in court?
There is surely something most foul
in this episode, and at present we are all left to our own devices for
figuring out the motives, men, and women in this drama. But one thing I
am sure about: this is as much about politics as it is about crime. For
why else would the DMK and its "I have something to hide behind my dark
glasses" leader be so keen on the arrest of the Swamiji, and why are sundry
Dalits being interviewed and quoted in this instance? The murdered man
was not a Dalit. The Kanchi seer has not abused Dalits. In fact, one of
the great ironies is that the Swamiji was seriously involved in projects
to ameliorate the condition of the Dalits. So, why is it that we are hearing
such invective aimed against the pontiff, including one by a Dalit woman
who is reported as calling for the destruction of the Kanchi hermitage
and temple? The ugly mix of caste, religion, and politics is indeed a dangerous
portent to the denouement of what may be a simple case of a pontiff who
succumbed to the seduction of money and power, if indeed that was the case,
or it is a deliberate and pungent mix to distract the people from the real
crimes committed or orchestrated by different people.
We should try and unravel this case
ourselves for we are sure to be distracted and detracted by forces which
for long in India have made it a fine art of dissembling to the people
and hoodwinking them. So, in that spirit, let us try and figure this case
out.
For the last seven years Sankararaman,
the man murdered, it is said, was managing the accounts of the Vaishanavite
Varadaraja Perumal Temple, not those of the Sankara Matham (What is it
with Indian newspapers spelling "matha" or "matham" as "mutt" and "math",
by the way?). So, he couldn't have been privy to any details of financial
irregularities on the part of Swami Jayendra Saraswati, supposing that
any such irregularity existed. By all reports, since 1987, Sankararaman
had an estranged relationship with the Kanchi seer. If that was the case,
how was it that he knew what was happening in the Sankara Matham? He even
had trouble visiting the Sankara matham, we are told, and therefore very
unlikely to have known the details of the accounts of that temple. What
could he have therefore exposed that threatened the Kanchi seer?
A few years ago, Sankararaman filed
a writ in the court challenging Jayendra Saraswati's proposed visit to
China. Sankararaman objected that a sannyasi cannot cross the seas. If
the Swamiji wanted, he can travel by road to China, he mindlessly argued.
Jayendra Saraswati cancelled the planned visit to China. If Sundararaman
could file a petition on such matters, why wouldn't he have filed a writ
if he had noticed financial irregularities?
Even if he had some knowledge or
information about the misuse of funds, the Sankara matham being a private
trust, was not accountable to the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments
department. What gives the DMK leader Karunanidhi, by the way, to urge
that "the government and the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments
department must explore avenues to save the Mutt and come up with a way
to ensure that it does not disintegrate" when he and his lumpen supporters
were beating up Hindu priests who attended the bail hearing for the Swamiji?
Karunanidhi also urged that the government take over the Kanchi hermitage.
Is this not clear indication that the DMK is involved in this matter in
ways that show their premeditation in harming the Sankaracharya? We do
know that the DMK leader and the Swamiji had crossed swords before. The
DMK is anti-Hindu, and has publicly avowed so.
Anyway, from what we can surmise,
prima facie there is no compelling motive for the murder. Let us look further
at the evidence so far presented by the police and the public prosecutor:
1. The public prosecutor and the
chief investigating police officer claim that phone calls were made from
the cell phone of the Swamiji to the accused murderers. As a friend pointed
out, if indeed the Swamiji was the mastermind behind the murder, would
he be stupid enough to talk directly to hit men from his cell phone? The
Swamiji's lawyer pointed out that the seer does not carry the cell phone
himself. Why is this "evidence" being released several weeks after the
murder? It would be interesting to know what kind of change, configuration
and security procedures the cell phone company call transaction system
has. Is it foolproof at the levels of on-line transaction and backup? If
not, this is no evidence at all, my friend points out.
2. One million rupees was withdrawn
the day after the murder, the prosecutor revealed, and parts of that supposedly
recovered from some of the criminals. According to sources, the temple
withdraws anywhere between 200,000 to 2,500,000 rupees every day. Often
parts of that amount are deposited back. This is due to two reasons: one,
the temple runs many projects - including three major charitable hospitals
in Chennai alone (Child's Trust Hospital, Hindu Mission Hospital, and Tamil
Nadu Hospital) -- and two, it also receives large donations.
If the temple authorities indeed
paid the "hired murderers", obviously they would not leave an easy trail
leading back to the temple. They would have paid the goons through some
clever scheme, or they would have paid from the as yet undeposited donations
to the temple. Why would they withdraw money from the bank to pay the hatchet
men? As someone who has worked in an Indian bank, I can say that no bank
records the serial numbers of currency notes disbursed unless there is
a police or Central Bureau of Investigation request to do so.
In the case of Shri Jayendra Saraswati,
nobody could have predicted that he was going to plot the death of a low
profile temple accountant, and therefore lay a trap in Kanchipuram to snare
the seer. So, the onus is on the police to prove that the money supposedly
recovered from the criminals was disbursed by the bank to the temple. But,
it doesn't stop there. The money was supposedly recovered from the murderers
several weeks after the murder of Sankararaman. How do we know that it
did not pass several legitimate hands after leaving the temple (assuming
it did) before it went to the murderers? The voluble public prosecutor
has to prove it didn't. If he can, then it means that there was a plot
to entrap the Swamiji. The plot would then indeed get thicker. What was
the prima facie case that led the prosecutor and sleuths to lay a trap
for the Swamiji?
3. A letter from Sankararaman to
the Swamiji threatening he would expose the misdeeds of the Swamiji to
the public/police is now claimed to be in the hands of the police. According
to the police, the Swamiji handed this letter over to the murderers and
asked them to trace the sender and his address. The police claim that they
recovered this letter from one of the murderers. Nothing sounds sillier
or amateurish than this. If indeed that is what happened, this plot should
enter the hall of fame of "dumb criminals" as a classic. Why should the
pontiff hand over the letter to the murderers? How could the murderers
trace the anonymous sender? If the pontiff did not have a clue about the
sender, how would the professional hit men from a different city (Chennai)
have a clue? Were they handwriting experts that went round the small town
asking people to give their samples of handwriting? If indeed the Swamiji
knew who sent the letter, where was the necessity to hand over the letter?
Kanchipuram is neither Baghdad nor Fallujah, nor the borderland between
Pakistan and Afghanistan. The Swamiji obviously knew where Sankararaman
worked and lived. If the motive indeed was murder, all that the Swamiji
or his henchmen had to do was order Sankararaman murdered. Why at all hand
over the letter?
If we don't smell a rat here, we
the gullible public will be to blame if this event leads to the undermining
of Hindu temples and institutions, and Hindu leadership in India. Obviously,
someone has been planting evidence. As I write this, I just saw a report
that says Karunanidhi declared that the Tamil Nadu government should take
over the Kanchi hermitage. This is sure to outrage Hindus. This is the
first salvo in a battle of wits, but there is, I believe, a reason to suspect
that this ploy is a smokescreen for something else. The Swamiji is being
offered as a sacrificial lamb by somebody else. Who could that be? Hmmm,
we wonder why Chief Minister Jayalalithaa is keeping silent in this matter.
Actually, according to reports, her "Jaya TV" has been equally harsh in
condemning the Swamiji as the DMK-owned "Sun TV".
Sankararaman is said to have petitioned
the Hindu Religious Endowment Board about some irregularities. There are
reports that the officials of the temple where he worked were also unhappy
because he was honest and strict. So, the reports that he sent, if at all
they contained any incriminating evidence, pertained to the temple that
he was intimately familiar with. It could not have pertained to the Sankara
matham. So, someone felt threatened by the reports he sent, and Sankararaman
had to be got rid of. We all know that the Dravidianist politicians of
Tamil Nadu always lease the temple properties at virtually no rent to commercial
businesses, slaughter-houses, etc. Did Sankararaman touch a raw nerve when
he started recovering rents? Or, did he uncover something even grave and
paid with his life?
Who would want the Swamiji implicated
and why? The answer can be found only when the real complaints filed by
Sankararaman are known -- if at all he really filed any. There is no confirmation
that he did. Remember that all the anonymous complaints were supposed to
have been written by one Kanapadigal. How did the police establish it was
Sankararaman? After all, his family had no clue that he had petitioned
any authority. If somebody had an urgent need to implicate the Swamiji,
some hermitage official most probably obliged them with a few phone calls.
May be it is time for us to implore
Hercule Poirot and Sherlock Holmes to come back from the grave and help
us resolve this.