Veerendra Heggade breaks silence on Dharmasthala allegations, calls charges “baseless, hurtful”
Dharmasthala: Dharmadhikari of Dharmasthala, Dr. Veerendra Heggade, has denied allegations of mass burials and other charges levelled against him and the Dharmasthala institution, calling them “totally baseless” and “morally wrong”. Speaking in an exclusive interview with PTI, Heggade said the campaign against Dharmasthala was driven by jealousy and aimed at damaging the temple’s reputation and the trust of devotees.
On Allegations and SIT Probe
Heggade said the allegations had deeply hurt him and his devotees, who continue to place immense faith in the temple. He welcomed the government’s decision to set up a Special Investigation Team (SIT), saying only a fair inquiry could clear the confusion created by false propaganda. “SIT was welcomed by us from the very beginning. If everything is investigated properly, truth will come out and doubts will be cleared,” he said.
He added that Dharmasthala had fully cooperated with every investigation in the past, including a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) inquiry held 13 years ago. “We have never hidden anything. All our institutions, records and practices are open to enquiry,” he said.
On Family’s Role and Property Allegations
Responding to questions about his family’s involvement in temple affairs, Heggade clarified that responsibilities were shared. His brothers manage different aspects one oversees educational institutions in Bengaluru, another handles administration at Dharmasthala including the free food programme, guest facilities and cleanliness. “Other brothers are independent, and my sister is married and settled in Dharwad,” he said.
On the real estate angle often raised in connection with the controversy, he firmly denied that the family had large holdings in Dharmasthala. “Institution subsidiaries own the properties. My family owns very little property here and there. All documents are proper and on record,” he explained.
Campaign Against Dharmasthala
Heggade said an organised campaign had been running against Dharmasthala since 2012, aimed at curbing the growth and popularity of the institution. “We are involved in temple renovation, rural development and other service activities. This has irked some people, who don’t want the institution to grow,” he said.
He cited examples of social work, including rejuvenation of 980 tanks across Karnataka, scholarships for students and financial support for farmers. “Instead of acknowledging these works, false allegations are made just to tarnish the name of the institution,” he remarked.
On Mass Burial Claims and Justice for Sowjanya
Referring to the most recent allegations of secret burials, Heggade said such claims were “impossible”. He explained that in rare cases where devotees passed away in Dharmasthala such as by drowning in the river the panchayat and police were immediately informed. “The recent masked man’s claims have collapsed. He has not been able to prove anything. It shows the entire story was cooked up,” he said.
On the 2012 Sowjanya rape and murder case, which continues to be linked to Dharmasthala by some campaigners, Heggade maintained that the institution had no role in the crime. “We were the ones who immediately informed the police and government. Allegations on my family members were made when they were not even in India,” he clarified. He added that dragging Dharmasthala into the case was unjust, though he too wanted justice for Sowjanya.
On Social Media, Kantara and Conspiracies
Heggade expressed concern over the role of social media in spreading conspiracies. He said unverified claims and YouTube content had misled many youngsters. “Social media is very powerful. It disturbed the minds of youth and diverted them from faith and temple traditions,” he said.
He also pointed out that some campaigners even tried to use the popularity of the Kannada film Kantara to push their agenda. “We were totally taken aback when such social media questions were thrown at us. A movie was connected to our story and even brought up in the High Court. We are totally innocent about it, but social media has that kind of influence today,” he explained.
At the same time, he noted that while Dharmasthala does extensive development work, the institution has never sought publicity. “We do it as duty to Lord Manjunatha. Unfortunately, social media highlights only negatives, not the good works,” he said.
Support Across Political Lines
Heggade said attempts to give the controversy a political colour were misleading. “BJP leaders came in support, but leaders from Congress and JDS have also visited us. This is not political. It is only an attempt to defame the institution and my name,” he stressed. He welcomed statements by Deputy Chief Minister D.K. Shivakumar and Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, both of whom assured that conspiracies would be exposed and anyone guilty would be punished. “What matters now is action, not just statements,” Heggade said.
Faith of Devotees Remains Strong
Despite the storm of allegations, Heggade said the temple’s daily activities and traditions had continued without disruption. “There is no change in devotees’ faith. Rituals, offerings, and customs are being carried out as always. Maybe some youngsters are influenced by false propaganda, but overall the faith remains as strong as ever,” he said.
He also dismissed the idea that being a Jain heading a Hindu temple was controversial. “In this district, many Hindu temples are managed by Jain families. It is an age-old tradition and never a matter of concern,” he said.
Heggade said he hoped the SIT investigation would conclude soon to avoid further confusion. “We wish for a permanent solution. We have exposed everything to SIT. Delay only creates more disturbance,” he said. Expressing confidence in public support, he added, “Everywhere people are saying Dharmasthala has to be protected. With both public and government aware of the truth, this conspiracy will end.”
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
