The Supreme Court on Thursday transferred the case related to Isha Foundation and spiritual guru Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev from the Madras High Court to itself.
The order comes two days after the High Court directed the Tamil Nadu government to submit details of all criminal cases registered against Isha Foundation. This, after a man moved the Court alleging that two of his daughters aged 42 and 39 years had been “brainwashed” to reside at the Isha Yoga Centre in Coimbatore.
The petitioner before the High Court, one S Kamaraj, also said that there were several criminal cases and allegations of sexual harassment and misconduct pending against the Foundation.
Notably, a Bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra passed the order when the matter was mentioned today by Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Isha Foundation.
The Bench interacted with the two women virtually in chambers. After the interaction, the Bench noted that they claimed that they were staying at the ashram voluntarily.
"The Court has interacted with both the individuals. During the interaction, the individuals stated that both individuals joined ashram at the age of 24 and 27. We interacted with both of them and they say they are staying voluntarily and that they are free to travel outside the ashram," the order noted.
It also ordered:
- The case shall be transferred to the Supreme Court from Madras High Court;
- Let the original petitioner appear on virtual platform or through his counsel;
- The status report of the police shall be submitted to Supreme Court;
- Police shall not take any further action in pursuance of directions of the High Court.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for the Central government in the matter, supporting Isha Foundation's plea.
"The High Court should have been very circumspect. This needs your attention."
During the hearing on September 30, the High Court had expressed serious doubts about why Vasudev had given his daughter in marriage and made her settle well in life, but was encouraging other women to renounce their material life.
“We want to know why a person who had given his daughter in marriage and made her settle well in life is encouraging the daughters of others to tonsure their heads and live the life of a hermitess. That is the doubt,” the Bench orally remarked.