The Special Investigation Team (SIT), which made a surprise move to arrest Sabarimala tantri Kandararu Rajeevaru in the gold scam case, has been dealt a severe blow with the Kollam Vigilance court observing that there is no evidence with the probe team to establish tantri's role in the alleged irregularities.

In the order granting bail to tantri in two cases, the court said that there is not even an iota of evidence from the side of SIT to establish any positive involvement of tantri in the alleged irregularities. 

The case of the SIT regarding criminal conspiracy fails on account of the admitted fact of tantri not signing the crucial mahazars of July 20, 2019 and May 18, 2019. According to the court, if there had been a conspiracy as alleged he would definitely have been a signatory to both the mahazars.

"Further, the mere signing of the first mahazar of July 19, 2019 by itself in the absence of any other incriminating circumstances is also not a ground to implicate tantri at this stage, especially since the mahazar was prepared pursuant to the formal decision of the Devaswom Board," the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge (Vigilance), Kollam observed.

Rajeevaru was arrested by the SIT on January 9, 2026. Initially arrested for alleged gold theft from door frames, he was arrested again in the second case while in judicial custody. The court said that tantri cannot sit in judgment over the formal decisions of the Travancore Devaswom Board to hand over Sabarimala temple artefacts for repair to Unnikrishnan Potty, the first accused in the case. 

The bail plea submitted by tantri's counsels; B Raman Pillai, Sujesh Menon, and C D Anil pointed out that the SIT fabricated a case by twisting his silence into conspiracy. The petition said that it was a case where a person who has no role to play in a transaction is roped in claiming that by not objecting to the act, he has given tacit consent. "The concept of silent permission when there is no positive obligation on the person to grant or refuse permission is a concept unknown to criminal law," the counsels said in the plea. 

The court further said that categories of artefacts are not directly related to the performance of pujas or rituals or other religious ceremonies daily or on special occasions at the Sannidhanam of the temple and all the artefacts in the two crimes are artefacts outside the sacred inner premises of the sanctum sanctorum of the temple.

The Judge also took note of the provisions in the Devaswom manual which say that the tantri is bound to render an opinion only when sought by the board and his duties are confined to pujas, ceremonies and religious practices alone.

"Tantri has absolutely no role to play regarding the repairs and maintenance and upkeep of valuable Thiruvabharanams of the Lord for which there is an entire hierarchy of officials under the Travancore Devaswom Manuals," the court observed.