Prayagraj (Uttar Pradesh) [India], February 21 : A Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) court in Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh, ordered the registration of an FIR against Jyotish Peeth Shankaracharya Swami Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati on Saturday. The order follows allegations of sexual exploitation of minors levelled against the religious leader.
Following the court's order, a case will now be registered at the Jhunsi police station. The complaint was filed under Section 173(4) by Shakumbhari Peethadhishwar Ashutosh Brahmachari Maharaj, who sought the registration of an FIR and strict action in the matter.
On February 13, the statements of two minor complainants were recorded in court via videography, and the court took formal cognisance of the police report. After recording these statements and considering the report, the court had reserved its judgment.
Ashutosh Brahmachari, who is associated with the Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi Mukti Nirman Trust and serves as Shakumbhari Peethadhishwar, had filed the application on January 28 under Section 173(4) after Jhunsi police allegedly failed to register a case. He has alleged that minor children were exploited at the ashram of Swami Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati and claimed to have submitted a CD containing evidence to the court.
Accordingly, the Station House Officer (SHO) of Jhunsi Police Station in District Prayagraj is hereby directed to immediately register a First Information Report based on the information and material placed on record. The FIR is to be filed under relevant provisions of the law, with the investigation to be conducted strictly in accordance with legal procedures.
The court ordered that the investigation should be carried out fairly and independently, ensuring full compliance with the provisions of the POCSO Act, particularly those concerning the protection of the victims' identity and dignity.
The office is directed to ensure immediate compliance with this order, and a compliance report must be submitted to the Court within the legally prescribed timeframe. It is further clarified that the Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case; all issues remain open for investigation, and the agency must act independently and strictly according to the law.