Written by Ganga Singh VII student of B.A.LL.B(H) at KR Mangalam University

The Dharamsthala mass burial case gained national attention after the temple’s former worker claimed to have buried bodies of hundreds of women and girls. He alleged that these women and girls were victims of sexual assault as disclosed by a whistleblower who had been employed on the administration’s payroll.

The whistleblower, former sanitation worker from the Dalit community, worked for the temple administration from 1995-2014, has come forward with the claim of being forced to bury the bodies of numerous alleged victims of sexual assault by individuals with significant power during this period.

The whistleblower filed a written complaint on July 3, 2025, with the Dharmasthala Police. The complaint was submitted through a letter supported by photographic evidence of skeletal remains he claimed he was forced to exhume secretly. As per the letter, the former sanitation worker alleged that he was forced to bury the bodies of victims for nearly two decades by the temple administration. The victims were mainly minor girls and women, who bore the signs of sexual abuse.

A week after the complaint was filed, the worker, who had requested anonymity, appeared in court under heavy police protection. To protect his identity, his body was fully wrapped from head to toe with only a transparent strip left over his eyes so he could see. According to the letter, the whistleblower claimed that he was forced to bury the bodies of victims of sexual abuse linked to powerful figures between 1998 and 2014 and presented further photographic evidence.

According to the whistleblower, those implicated were connected to the temple administration. As mentioned in his complaint, he also claimed that he was regularly threatened with death if he refused to comply with the orders from his supervisor. The whistleblower alleged that his superiors told him, “We will cut you into pieces. Your body will be buried like the rest.”

The series of incident of burying bodies began one evening, when the worker’s manager called him and said “An unknown woman’s body has been found. Bury it somewhere remote, quietly.” Then day after day he was ordered to bury another body at the ghats, at another spot in the forest. He described several bodies as having acid burns on the face, fractured bones, missing innerwear, and visible bruises. Each corpse bore the scars of unspeakable violence. He developed a grim ritual of digging two pits, one for the corpse and another for its clothes. As the years passed, he continued burying the bodies and erasing the identities of victims including women, minor girls, and unhoused individuals.

The informant also revealed that some of these burials were carried out on the banks of the holy Netravathi River. He claimed the site was chosen to keep the bodies hidden and to accelerate decomposition in the damp soil.

In another disturbing detail, the informant revealed that in 2010, near a petrol bunk in Kalleri, he buried the body of schoolgirl aged between twelve and fifteen years, who was then clad in school uniform with a missing skirt and innerwear, and bore marks of sexual assault and strangulation.

In another incident he mentioned being ordered to burn with diesel a 20-year-old woman, whose face was burnt with acid and her body was wrapped in newspaper.

On October 9, 2012, a seventeen-year-old Soujanya, a pre-university student at Sri Dharmasthala Manjunatheshwara College went missing while returning from college. Her body was found the next day in a forest near the college with torn clothes and missing innerwear. Initially the case was being investigated by Karnataka Police, then it was transferred to CID. Eventually the case was being investigated by CBI. The prime suspect Santosh Rao was acquitted in 2023 due to insufficient evidence according to the court records.

The whistleblower fled Dharmasthala in 2014, after a minor girl from his family was assaulted by someone linked to his supervisors. Now he has come forward after a decade later out of guilt and need for justice.

While Soujanya’s murder has already passed through multiple investigative agencies without any conviction, the whistleblower’s revelations cast in a new light. His claims of systematic cover-ups prompted the Karnataka government to order the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to conduct a comprehensive investigation in all the cases related to mass burial.

The Special Investigation Team is probing into the allegations of mass burial at Dharmasthala. The officials of SIT after interrogating the complainant (eye-witness) for two days at the Intelligence Bureau at Mangaluru, mapped out 13 suspected burials sites. The officials along with complainant have started to inspect some spots near the Dharmasthala where the latter claims the bodies have been buried. According to the officials investigating these spots was an important part of the procedure to obtain permission to exhume these bodies.

While eleven out of these thirteen excavation spots have been searched thoroughly in the presence of officials, police personnels, forensic staff, and revenue department staff. No human remains were found at the first five excavation sites. At a depth of three feet at the sixth excavation site partial skeletal remains were found. At the seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth site no human remains were found.

While the SIT was preparing to excavate the 11^th, the complainant pointed out another site near it where the SIT personnel found a human skull, and a few bones of the human body. The new site is in Banglegudde area. A red sari with a knot tied was also found at this new site at the end of a tree.

The SIT has already sent the skeletal remains found at site six for forensic examination.

There were no remains found at the twelfth site. The SIT has planned to conduct a GPR (Ground Penetrating Radar) survey before starting the excavation at the thirteenth site. This is due to the site having multiple electricity lines and its close proximity to the main road.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has refused to consider a plea to restrain the publication of alleged defamatory reports in Dharmasthala mass burial case. The bench said “Gag orders are super injunctions. They stifle free speech. In this case there is one sanitation worker. If we pass super injunction even his speech cannot be reported……we live in a free country.”

The Dharmasthala mass burial case presents a critical test for the integrity of India’s legal system and public administration. The whistleblower’s revelations about the cover-ups of the allegations of mass burials of victims of sexual assault challenges the legal system as well as public administration. It has also shaken the public trust in the temple and its institutions. If the allegations are substantiated, they challenge the very foundation of rule of law, due process, and public accountability. This has also raised serious question about whether our justice system has failed to protect vulnerable individuals. The journey of Soujanya’s case has also sparked major outrage after the revelation’s as the main suspect was acquitted on the account of insufficient evidence beyond reasonable doubt. But it also raises questions on the transparency and unbiasedness of the investigation. Another question is whether the public administration of Dharmasthala was involved in this alleged mass burial. The outcome of this case will serve as a powerful indicator of whether our system can effectively and impartially investigate allegations. Can our justice system deliver a judgment which will ultimately serve the victims.