The Supreme Court on Monday grilled Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister (CM) N Chandrababu Naidu for prematurely going public with the claim that previous regime of Yuvajana Sramika Rythu (YSR) Congress Party used substandard ghee containing animal fat to prepare laddus at Sri Venkateswara temple in Tirupati.
A Bench of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan said there is no conclusive proof yet to substantiate such a claim and questioned the need to make a public statement on the issue when a probe had already been ordered by the State into the allegations.
Justice Gavai also asked whether there was any material with the CM to conclude definitively that animal fat had been used to prepare laddus at the Hindu shrine in Andhra Pradesh, where Lord Venkateswara is worshipped.
Adding to it, Justice Viswanathan observed that the ghee sample had been rejected as per reports.
"So what was the need to go to the press at all, when you yourself ordered investigation?" the judge asked.
"At least the Gods should be kept away from politics," the Court remarked further.
The Court also asked whether the laddus, which became basis for the probe, had been sent for testing. It also remarked whether it would not have been more appropriate to test those first before going public.
It further said that there was no prima facie evidence to show that the ghee in question was used in the process of making laddus.
"Whether such a statement should have been made that affects the sentiments of the devotees? What was the need of going to the press and making public statement when SIT was ordered? Prima facie there is nothing atleast to show, no concrete proof to show at this stage, that the same ghee was used and procured. Even pending investigation when such statements are made by responsible public functionaries then what effect it will have on the SIT? What was the material?"
The Court told that Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra, representing Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam (TTD), that he was not answering court's queries on this aspect.
"You have still not answered. There is nothing to show that ghee was used. These are processes used to justify the rejection and stop payment!"
When the Court pointed out that TTD Executive Officer himself had contradicted the CM in the matter, Luthra said the petitioners were relying on newspaper reports to claim so. He also said the statement had been made with regard to some of the tankers.
"Take instructions before you place your stand. There is nothing to say contaminated one was used, that is not your own stand. Today you have no answer. There was no basis at all for public statements, let us not mince words on it, when investigation was ordered!," the Court said in response.
The Court also commented that if complaints were there, samples should have been taken from every tanker and not someone specific.
In the order passed after the hearing, the Court said the CM had made the statement even prior to lodging of the FIR and forming of the Special Investigation Team (SIT).
"We are of the prima facie view that when investigation was ordered, it was not appropriate for a high constitutional functionary go public with the information."
Accordingly, the Court asked the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to inform it whether the SIT formed by the State should be allowed to continue with the probe or investigation should be transferred to a different agency.
The matter will be heard again on October 3.
At least four petitions seeking probe into the allegations have been filed before the top court.
Swamy has sought setting up of a court-monitored committee to probe the allegations in view of the fact that CM Naidu's statement had been controverted by Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD) Executive Officer.
His counsel, Senior Advocate Rajshekhar Rao began arguments in the case today.
"I am here as a devotee too. This is a matter of concern too. The statement made in the press about the contamination has far reaching implications and can raise a whole lot of other issues and disturb communal harmony," Rao submitted.
He added Swamy was concerned only regarding the basis on which a categoric statement had been made by the CM.
"Public statement by someone who holds a position of responsibility. Was lab testing done, was sample taken from offerings or rejected material? Who was the supplier and when was it procured, is there mechanism for testing even randomly? Whether any political intervention should be permissible?"
Senior Counsel Mukul Rohatgi, representing the State, opposed the petitions, particularly of Swamy, "These petitions are not bonafide but only to attack the present government. Dr Swamy's shows clearly. I have appointed SIT," Rohatgi submitted.
During the hearing, Mehta, who was asked by the Court to assist it, submitted that an inquiry was essential in the case.
"This is a matter of faith. It needs to be examined as to who was responsible and what purpose...," Mehta said.
Other petitions
Reddy has sought directions to the Centre and Andhra Pradesh government, TTD and CM Naidu not to 'publicize or propagate the said issue'.
In another petition, Sampath and Sridhar have sought directions to the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) and other authorities to conduct monthly inspections of the ingredients used in religious offerings at all major temples in India, and a national regulatory framework for the same.
They have also sought a Special Investigation Team led probe headed by a retired judge. A direction has also been sought that the boards managing the Tirupati temple and other key religious institutions consist solely of practicing Hindus.
