The Supreme Court of India has intervened to stay the Madras High Court‘s directive against Isha Foundation and its founder, Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev. The decision came after Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi brought the matter to the attention of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud.
Overview of the Supreme Court’s Stay
The Supreme Court’s stay order came in response to the Madras High Court’s request for the Tamil Nadu government to provide a report detailing all criminal cases registered against Isha Foundation. The foundation approached the Supreme Court following the High Court’s directive, which also involved police action against the foundation.
The case originated from a habeas corpus plea filed by a retired professor, S Kamaraj, alleging that his two daughters, aged 42 and 39, had been “brainwashed” into staying at the Isha Foundation’s ashram in Coimbatore and were not allowed to communicate with their family.
Supreme Court’s Actions and Rulings
After hearing the case, the Supreme Court bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud, along with Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, interacted directly with the two women. Both confirmed that they were staying at the ashram of their own free will and had not been detained.
Key decisions made by the Supreme Court include:
- Transfer of the case from the Madras High Court to the Supreme Court.
- Allowing the original petitioner, S Kamaraj, to appear virtually or through legal counsel.
- Directing the police to submit a status report to the Supreme Court.
- Ordering a halt to any further police action based on the Madras High Court’s directive.
Arguments in the Supreme Court
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi argued that the Madras High Court had acted improperly by ordering police action based on oral assertions in a habeas corpus case. He emphasized that the two women had already appeared in court, confirming they were at the ashram by choice.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, also supporting the foundation, contended that the Madras High Court should have been more cautious before initiating any investigation, particularly because the foundation deals with spiritual and religious matters.
The Original High Court Order
The Madras High Court had issued its initial order after considering Kamaraj’s habeas corpus petition. He alleged that his daughters had been manipulated into living at the Isha Foundation, depriving them of contact with their family. In addition to these claims, he mentioned several criminal allegations, including cases of sexual harassment linked to the foundation.
The High Court had questioned why Sadhguru would encourage others to renounce worldly life while ensuring his own daughter was married and leading a settled life.
Following the High Court’s order, a police raid was conducted at the ashram, leading the Isha Foundation to escalate the matter to the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court’s Interaction with the Detainees
During the Supreme Court proceedings, the two women, who were the subject of the habeas corpus petition, appeared before the court and stated that they had been living at the ashram voluntarily. They further explained that they had faced harassment from their father for the past eight years.
After hearing their statements, the court ruled that there was no basis for further police action. The court noted that the previous habeas corpus case filed by the women’s mother had resulted in a similar conclusion, reinforcing that their stay at the ashram was voluntary.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s decision to stay the Madras High Court’s order and transfer the case reflects its careful consideration of individual autonomy and religious freedom. While the criminal investigation against a doctor associated with the foundation continues, the court has limited the scope of the case, particularly with regard to the habeas corpus petition.
Key Points:
- The Supreme Court stayed the Madras High Court’s order against Isha Foundation.
- The case has been transferred to the Supreme Court for further deliberation.
- Both women involved in the case confirmed they were staying at the ashram voluntarily.
- The court directed police to halt further action and submit a status report.
This ruling marks a significant development in the ongoing legal matters concerning the Isha Foundation and highlights the balance between religious freedom and the need for judicial oversight.
