New Delhi: Raising strong objections to remarks made by the Madras High Court on “monastic tradition”, the Isha Foundation—a Coimbatore-based nonprofit spiritual organisation founded by Jaggi Vasudev, popularly known as Sadhguru—approached the Supreme Court Thursday, saying the comments by the high court judges go against Sanatana Dharma.
“Monastic tradition is considered to be sacred in all religions and a person is supposed to have attained civil death upon monkhood even under the law. The remarks of the hon’ble judges against the monastic tradition also goes against Sanatana Dharma, which is followed by people of this country,” the foundation said in its plea challenging the Madras HC decision dated 30 September.
In its decision, the high court had ordered an inquiry into allegations about a petitioner’s daughter being on a fast to death unless her father gave up the case against the Isha Foundation. Following this, a police team comprising about 150 officers reached the foundation on the morning of 1 October (Tuesday), and started questioning monks, volunteers, staff, sevadars, guests and even children, till night, the foundation said.
On the following day (Wednesday, 2 October), the officials came back with the same force and started questioning the various licences held by the foundation, the nonprofit said.
It also claimed that the police entered the quarters of the monks and checked the kinds of medicines they were taking, adding that this search operation “significantly disrupted the sanctity of the ashram”, “infringed upon the privacy of individuals within it, and violated their rights under Article 21 of the Constitution”.
Also Read: Supreme Court letting states subclassify SCs-STs. I call it ‘Constitution amendment by stealth’
What happened before the top court
The Supreme Court Thursday restrained the Tamil Nadu Police from taking any further action against the Isha Yoga Centre in Coimbatore, pursuant to the Madras HC directions.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud and comprising justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, transferred to itself from the Madras HC the habeas corpus petition in which it had passed the order.
The bench asked the police to submit the status report, sought by the HC, to the apex court. “Police shall not take any further action in pursuance of directions in paragraph 4 of the high court’s order,” the court ordered.
The order of the top court came after an urgent hearing requested by senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, on behalf of the Isha Foundation, contending that a police team of about 150 officers entered the ashram for investigation following the HC’s directions.
The foundation’s case
In Isha Foundation v. Dr. S. Kamaraj & Ors., the foundation challenged the Madras HC ruling dated 30 September, to the extent of the “scathing observations and unwarranted directions” passed by the HC.
Saying that it is known for its long-standing dedication to human well-being by teaching yoga and meditation, the foundation contended that the “unwarranted inquiry” jeopardises its integrity and reputation built over 30 years of service.
The matter arose from a habeas corpus plea, which was filed by one Dr. S. Kamaraj, alleging that his two daughters—42-year-old Geetha Kamaraj and 39-year-old Latha Kamaraj—were being held captive by the foundation. He also said that his daughters had become victims of “brainwashing” and adopted monastic identities, severing ties with their family.
However, when the Madras HC issued a notice on their father’s plea, the daughters, who had embraced monkhood in 2011, expressed their voluntary commitment to the foundation, confirming that they weren’t being held against their will. Hence, the petitioner foundation argued that the proceedings ought to have been terminated as no case of habeas corpus was made out.
Saying the habeas corpus plea was a “mischievous” one, the foundation contended that the two women weren’t minors, but in their 30s and 40s, and that they had appeared before the court physically, interacted with the judges, and informed them that they had been with the foundation voluntarily for over 17 years.
It also said that this wasn’t the first time such a plea had been filed by the girls’ family members, and that the HC had dismissed a similar plea by their mother in 2016.
A second petition after eight years—with identical allegations on the same cause of action—is nothing but an abuse of court process, the plea said, citing the top court’s 1973 ruling in Kanu Sanyal v. District Magistrate, Darjeeling, where it said that a habeas corpus petition should not be converted into a trial for the inquiry of alleged wrongs.
In its petition, the foundation also said that it is a not-for-profit organisation founded by Sadhguru, a yogi and mystic dedicated to raising human consciousness. It added that the court’s intrusive actions not only infringe on the daughters’ autonomy, but also set a troubling precedent for future judicial overreach without substantive grounds.
What the HC had ordered
On 30 September, the Madras HC had sought details of the criminal cases registered against the foundation and directed the additional public prosecutor (APP) to collect all case details and place them before it for consideration.
The court had also said that given the seriousness of the allegations raised against the foundation and the “manner in which the detenues” had spoken before it, it thought best to “understand the truth behind the allegations” after some more deliberation.
Referring to the affidavit filed by the father, the HC had also pointed out that on 15 June, the elder daughter, Geetha, called her father and said that her sister, Latha, was practising fasting to death till the petitioner gave up his litigation against the Isha Yoga Centre.
Finally, the Madras HC had directed the Coimbatore Rural police to file a status report before the court and listed the matter for hearing Friday.
(Edited by Radifah Kabir)
Also Read: Thumbs-up emoji cost a railway constable his job. Now, Madras HC has come to his rescue