Dharmasthala Case: Complainant Accused in Major Twist as SIT Files Charge Sheet

You know, for years, the brutal murder and sexual assault of Sowjanya in Dharmasthala back in 2012 has haunted public discourse, stirring countless debates and allegations of cover-ups. It’s a case that has simply refused to fade away from public memory, fueled by persistent questions and calls for justice. And now, in a truly stunning development, the Special Investigation Team (SIT) investigating a related 'illegal burial' claim has submitted its charge sheet, completely upending the narrative and casting the original complainant as a key accused.

Yes, you read that right. Chetan Poojary, the very person who brought forth allegations of a hidden, illegal burial to the CID (which later became the SIT) — claiming it was the 'real' Sowjanya and pointing fingers at a high-level conspiracy to protect powerful individuals — is now himself among the six individuals named as accused. What a twist, isn't it?

For those unfamiliar, Poojary's initial complaint painted a vivid, unsettling picture: a different body was supposedly buried illegally in Dharmasthala, and it was that body, he argued, that belonged to the murdered Sowjanya. His theory suggested an elaborate cover-up involving police, doctors, and even administrative staff connected to the revered temple town, all to shield certain figures and wrongly implicate an innocent man in the primary murder case.

However, what the SIT painstakingly uncovered, following a thorough investigation into Poojary’s specific claims, paints an entirely different picture. Their findings suggest that the body illegally buried was not Sowjanya's at all, but rather that of a woman named Savithri, who had tragically died in an accident. More critically, the SIT concluded that Poojary and the other five accused — Nityananda, Harish, Kavyashree, Lokesh, and Shivaprasad — actively fabricated evidence and knowingly provided false statements, all with the intent to mislead the ongoing investigation and manipulate public perception.

Consequently, the charge sheet, submitted to the Special Court for SIT cases, now levies serious charges under various sections of the Indian Penal Code. We're talking about Section 201 for causing the disappearance of evidence, Section 193 for giving false evidence, Section 211 for making a false charge of an offense, and Section 120B for criminal conspiracy. These aren't minor accusations; they strike at the heart of integrity in judicial processes.

This development is, without doubt, a significant moment in the complex Dharmasthala case saga. It essentially dismantles a major conspiracy theory that has long shadowed the initial murder investigation, shifting the focus from an alleged institutional cover-up to a potential deliberate attempt to mislead justice. One can only imagine the implications this will have on the ongoing legal proceedings and the public's understanding of this enduring mystery.