Allahabad HC grants anticipatory bail to Avimukteshwaranand in POCSO case | India News
The Allahabad High Court has granted anticipatory bail to seer Swami Abhimukteswarananda Saraswati and his disciple Mukundananda Brahmachari in a case involving allegations of sexual exploitation of minors under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses (POCSO) Act.The relief was granted on Wednesday by Justice Jitendra Kumar Sinha, who ordered both the complainant and the accused to refrain from making any public statements about the case.The court granted the anticipatory bail plea insisting that the investigation should continue without external influence. Besides exempting them from arrest, the court also issued a gag order on both parties, preventing them from speaking to the media about the matter.The order came weeks after the court reserved its verdict after a detailed hearing and had earlier extended interim protection from arrest to the accused.
Interim protection and court supervision
On February 27, the High Court stayed Abhimukteswarananda’s arrest, barring him from custody pending a final order. During the proceedings, the court directed both the state government and the complainant to file their responses and asked the accused to fully cooperate with the investigation.
Complaint and FIR details
The case arose out of an FIR registered at the Jhunsi police station in Prayagraj following the directions of a POCSO court. The complaint alleges sexual exploitation of several ‘batuks’ (young disciples) associated with the ashram.The complainant, Ashutosh Pandey alias Ashutosh Brahmachari, claimed that minors were subjected to torture, expressing hope that “justice will be served after submitting evidence in court.”
Arguments of Defense and Prosecution
The defense has strongly denied the allegations, calling them fabrications. It argued that the complainant had a criminal background and claimed that the alleged victims had never lived in the seer’s ashram. The seer also questioned the veracity of the medical report and accused the complainant of trying to influence the case.In a notable submission, Abhimukteswarananda expressed his willingness to undergo a narcotics analysis to establish his innocence.The state, however, opposed the anticipatory bail plea on procedural grounds, arguing that the accused had gone directly to the High Court instead of going to the Sessions Court first.
