The Supreme Court on Monday (November 24) disposed of a petition seeking a court-monitored investigation into alleged instances of sexual abuse in boarding schools run by the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON).
A Bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice R Mahadevan refused to entertain the writ petition directly but granted liberty to the petitioners to approach the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) and the respective State Commissions for Protection of Child Rights (SCPCR) in Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal.
Background: The Plea for Investigation
The writ petition was filed by Rajneesh Kapur, alongside the Justice for Srila Prabhuda Foundation and the Radhey Krishna Legal Aid Foundation. The petitioners alleged that internal records and victim testimonies indicated a "larger pattern" of serious sexual abuse in ISKCON-run gurukuls (boarding schools).
The plea contended that despite complaints being lodged with local police authorities regarding specific incidents, no substantial action had been taken. The petitioners sought the intervention of the Top Court to ensure a fair inquiry, arguing that the alleged abuse was systemic and had been suppressed by the institution's management.
Arguments of the Parties
During the hearing, the counsel for the petitioners submitted that the material placed before the Court represented only a fraction of the alleged abuse. They argued that earlier representations made to child rights bodies had gone unanswered, necessitating judicial oversight.
Appearing for ISKCON, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal vehemently opposed the petition, characterizing it as "motivated." Sibal submitted that the petition was a fallout of the ongoing factional dispute between the Bangalore and Mumbai units of ISKCON, a matter currently pending before a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court. He argued that the allegations were being weaponised to settle scores in the property and management dispute.
The petitioners, however, denied any link to the factional conflict, maintaining that their sole concern was the welfare of the children.
Court's Observations and Directions
The Bench declined to keep the petition pending, noting that statutory bodies specifically constituted to handle child rights violations were the appropriate forum for such grievances.
Addressing the friction between the parties, Justice BV Nagarathna orally remarked:
"This case has something to do with children... that's why we have asked you to go to the neutral body."
The Court directed the petitioners to submit a fresh representation or reminder to the NCPCR and the State Commissions of Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal.
"We dispose of this petition by reserving liberty to the petitioners herein to make a fresh representation/reminder to NCPCR, UP SCPCR and West Bengal SCPCR to bring to the notice of these respondents the allegations that are ventilated in this petition," the Bench ordered.
The Court further clarified that if such representations are made, the Commissions must consider them strictly in accordance with the law, having regard to the gravity of the allegations raised.
Procedural Next Steps
With the disposal of the writ petition, the onus now shifts to the NCPCR and the State Commissions to examine the fresh representations. The Supreme Court has not set a specific deadline but has mandated that the grievances be considered on their merits.
Case Title: Rajneesh Kapur & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
Coram: Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice R Mahadevan