Crime Branch to drop investigation in Gangeshananda bobbitisation case

In 2022, Crime Branch's final investigation report had concluded that the complainant woman and her male friend Ayyappadas, who was Gangeshananda's disciple, planned to mutilate him. Photo: Manorama.

Thiruvananthapuram: In the controversial 2017 case regarding the bobitisation of Swami Gangeshananda at Pettah here, the Crime Branch is planning to drop the investigation, reported Manorama News.

Apparently, they haven't filed the chargesheet in the case yet. The legal advice given in the case was also not followed, as per reports.

In 2022, in a major twist in the case, their final investigation report had concluded that the complainant woman and her male friend Ayyappadas, who was Gangeshananda's disciple, planned to mutilate him. It was also alleged that Ayyappadas bought the knife, which the girl used to injure Gangeshananda.

Gangeshananda was bobbitised on the night of May 19, 2017 allegedly by the 23-year-old law student. It was initially reported that it was done in self-defence while resisting his advances. The swami used to visit the young woman’s house regularly as he was close to her family.

However, the complainant later changed her statement before the High Court. She told the court that Gangeshananda had not harmed her, but carried out the act based on compulsion from her friend Ayyappadas. Incidentally, the woman’s family members also gave a statement in support of Gangeshananda.

The Crime Branch, during its probe, learnt that the woman and Ayyappadas considered Gangeshananda as a hindrance to their plan to live together and decided to harm him.

The idea to cut off Gangeshananda’s genitals was Ayyappadas’s, said officers.

“The woman and Ayyappadas watched YouTube videos on bobbitisation at Kollam and Alappuzha beaches and prepared the plan. Ayyappadas brought the knife for the act,” said an officer.

Meanwhile, Crime Branch had said that the procedures in the sexual harassment case against Gangeshananda will continue even though the complainant had retracted her statement, based on some Supreme Court orders.

The comments posted here/below/in the given space are not on behalf of Onmanorama. The person posting the comment will be in sole ownership of its responsibility. According to the central government's IT rules, obscene or offensive statement made against a person, religion, community or nation is a punishable offense, and legal action would be taken against people who indulge in such activities.