Sabarimala Gold Theft: Kerala High Court Denies Bail To Former Former Devaswom Board Officials And Jeweller Roddam
Sanchayita Lahkar
The Kerala High Court Single Bench of Justice A. Badharudeen dismissed the regular bail applications of a former President of the Travancore Devaswom Board, a former Administrative Officer, and a devotee accused of misappropriating gold from the Sabarimala temple. The prosecution alleged that the accused conspired to replace original gold-cladded Dwarapalaka sculptures and sanctum door frames with items falsely recorded as copper plates, thereby facilitating the extraction and theft of over four kilograms of gold under the guise of repair works. Noting that the accused were duty-bound to protect the temple assets yet prima facie involved in looting the deity’s property, the Court held that their release would impede the ongoing investigation and the recovery of the missing gold.
The prosecution case centers on an alleged criminal conspiracy hatched in 2019 to misappropriate gold-cladded copper plates from the Sabarimala Sreekovil, specifically the Dwarapalaka sculptures and the sanctum door frames. The prosecution contended that in 1998, the UB Group had cladded approximately 30 kilograms of gold on these temple structures. In February and March 2019, accused Unnikrishnan Potty (A1) submitted an application to repair and gold-plate these items. The prosecution submitted evidence indicating that official records were falsified to describe the gold-cladded items merely as "copper plates" to facilitate their removal from the temple premises.
The Travancore Devaswom Board, in a meeting chaired by the former President A. Padmakumar on March 19, 2019, sanctioned the handing over of these items to Unnikrishnan Potty. Subsequently, the items were transported to Smart Creations in Chennai without proper Devaswom escort or supervision, where the original gold was allegedly stripped and misappropriated. The prosecution alleged that while the original items contained over 4 kilograms of gold liable for recovery, only a fraction was retrieved or replated using gold sponsored by the petitioner Govardhan. The accused, including the former Board President, Administrative Officer B. Murari Babu, and devotee Roddam Govardhan, were charged under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(1)(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The Court recorded serious observations regarding the role of the Travancore Devaswom Board officials in the alleged misappropriation. Regarding the involvement of the former President, the Court observed, "the option of the Investigating Officer to question all the Devaswom Board members jointly to get more details of the misappropriation and the manner in which the gold was misappropriated would be spoiled, if Sri.A.Padmakumar will be released at this stage. That apart, Sri.A.Padmakumar, who held the post of President of the Travancore Devaswom Board and a former member of legislative assembly is very influential and if he will be released on bail, he would definitely interfere with the investigation including the recovery of the remaining part of gold alleged to be misappropriated,"
Addressing the role of the former Administrative Officer, B. Murari Babu, the Court noted that "Sri.Murai Babu is one among the prime accused in both crimes, and when serious allegations of this nature are raised, that too, misappropriation from a temple by the persons, who were assigned to protect the same become the looters, grant of bail to such an accused could not be considered, particularly when the investigation is on the mid stage, where recovery of a large portion of the gold ornaments is yet to be effected. Therefore, if he would be released on bail, he would stand in the way of investigation including recovery of the gold and in such view of the matter, for the reasons extracted hereinabove and for this reason, his bail application also must fail."
Regarding the petitioner Govardhan, the Court observed that "It is well established fact that the petitioner received the gold from Mr.Pankaj Bhandari (A12) knowing that it was the gold extracted from the door frame and connected plates". The Court further stated, "If he was innocent and as an Ayyappa devotee as claimed by him, he ought to have informed the Devaswom Board officials or any other responsible person instead of receiving this gold recovered from the above items".
The Court further observed: "Be it so, the antique value of the gold misappropriated after removing the same from Dwarapalaka pillars and door frames so close to the holy Deity of Sabarimala Ayyappan could not be quantified in terms of money. No doubt, for these reasons, these crimes have an independent identity and the same separates these crimes from the ordinary crimes where grant of bail has been recognized as a rule. Thus, these crimes are definitely crimes which would fall under the category of exception. In such a case, pre-mature release of Govardhan would definitely impede the investigation of these crimes. In such view of the matter, the bail plea, at the instance of Govardhan, at this stage could not be considered and therefore, his bail application must fail."
The Court expressed shock at the nature of the allegations, observing that "Sri.Unnikrishnan Potty created an aura and enjoyed an unbridled freedom to devour the valuable gold of the holy deity, with connivance of the accused persons and this would not be possible without the involvement of some big guns". Consequently, the Court held that "In order to have an effective prosecution of the culprits involved in these crimes, recovery of the misappropriated gold is absolutely essential" and that releasing the petitioners would "stand in the way of investigation".
The Court directed: "Accordingly, these bail applications stand dismissed. It is made clear that if Sri.Murari Babu is entitled to get statutory bail on failure on the part of the prosecution to file final report in any of the cases, he is set at liberty to move the same and the same shall be considered in accordance with law".
Regarding the co-accused K.P. Sankardas, the Court issued a mandatory direction to the Medical Superintendent, Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram, "to form a competent Medical Board of expert doctors and to file a comprehensive report based on the opinion of the Medical Board inclusive of the Medical Board report with specific mention whether such an ailment had been there inasmuch as Sri.K.P.Sankardas is concerned". The report also must contain what is the present ailment of Sri.K.P.Sankardas and the treatment thereof with specific assertion as to whether his hospitalization further more is required and also whether treatment, if any, can be continued inside the jail". The Medical Superintendent was "directed to file the report on or before 27.01.2026 in a sealed cover before the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court".
"Registry is directed to forward a copy of this order with a covering letter to the Superintendent, Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram to get the report, as directed in paragraph No.24 of this order without fail and place the report soon after getting the same".
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioners: Sri. P. Vijayabhanu (Senior Advocate), Smt. Sruthy N. Bhat, Sri. P.M. Rafiq, Sri. M. Revikrishnan, Sri. S. Rajeev, Sri. V. Vinay.
For the Respondents: Addl. Director General of Prosecution Sri. Gracious Kuriakose, Sr. Public Prosecutor Sri. C.K. Suresh.
Case Title: Roddam Pandurangaiah Naga Govardhan v. State of Kerala, A. Padmakumar v. State of Kerala, B. Murari Babu v. State of Kerala
Neutral Citation: 2026: KER:5053
Case Number: Bail Appl. 14662/2025 and Bail Appl. 172/ 2026, Bail Appl. 14761/2025 and Bail Appl. 14762/2025 & Bail Appl. 148/ 2026 and Bail Appl. 149/ 2026
Bench: Justice A. Badharudeen
