¢ 1500 Ls 19/8 SARARIMALA TEMPLE ARSON CASE, Kuquiry Report of Shiri K. Kesava Menon, Deputy Lispector- Geueral of Police, Special Branch, O.1.D. (On Special Duty) ‘The firat information in this ease to the Police was on the night of L6th June 1950, when the Devaswom Commisstoner and the President of the Devasowm Board informed the Inspector-General of Police that when the Santhikaran went to the Sabarimala: Temple on the 14th June 1950, he found the Sreekovil, the Mandapam and the storeroom completely gutted by fire and the Idol damaged, that (he temple was I: on the 6th of Edavem 1126 1200) May 1950) tie nstual Pooja and except for five day in Malabar tii-wher there will be Pooja, the temple is usually closed ain’ ttiat there iz no habitation for 10 to 16 miles around, thyt, sthe Sdithikarion stated that there was evidence that the stores and kitchen quarters have been forcibly entered into, vesselaylimving_been thrown out, and that a kerosene lantern was{ouldvin the Sreekovil. i ‘The Inspector-General of Police then directed the District Superintendent of Police, Quilon, to proceed to the spot and make inguiries and also informed the Assistant Inapector- General of Police to pursue the inquiries and direct the investi- gation, i: The. District Superintendent of Police, Quilon, and party visited the Sabarimala Temple, the scene of occurrence, and made inquiries, The Inspector-General of Police and the Asst. nspector-General of Police also visited the scene of ocourrence on 20-6-1950 and made enquiried. ‘The District Superintendent of Police, Quilon and Party who vidited the temple af, the earliest opportunity found the following; 1. There were 15 cut maria of violence on the door lead- ing to the Sreekovil indicating forcible entry into (he Sreelovil, The oxistence of such marks goes agninst the theory of accident. 2, The idol was found broken, the head, left hand palm and fingers separated. There were ‘cut marks on the face of the idal as well as on the foreheadTf the brealcing of the idol alone is taken Into consideration, a possible point that the rafters and other copper and other appliances of the roof of the Sreekovil could have fallen down: on the idol and caused the damage arises for serutiny, but the marke of violence on the brass-plated doar of the Sreekovil together with the marks on the idol, raise the irresistible eon: clusion that the forcible entry into the Sreekovil was for the purpose of breaking the idol and that the weapon that was qised to cause the cut marks on the door was the same used to break the idol. At the acene of occurrence, there was am axe and it is definite that thal axe was tsed to cut the Sreekovil door, as traces of brass were found on the sharp eilge of the axe, and hence it has to be said that the fire was not accidental. Next it may be argued thab the entry was for committing theft, but apparently that docs not seem to be the motive, since nothing valuable, vix., silver, gold and other utensils which were inside have been removed. The temple and its surrounding buildings were built: up of wood, copper, brass, which are not easily inflammable, but they have been completely burnt. This is evidence enough to show that great effort has been male to set fire to the temple and speaks a deliberate action. When the Potti and party left on the morning of 6-10-1125, the temple was in tact. They are the only petsons who had access into the temple and there was the possibility of an accident by the fire spreading due to the negligence of the Potti and his subordinates. Thus it could haye taken place only during their stay. The possibility of the Potti and the Devaswom party hushing up an accidental fire has to be ruled out, as it is clear that there cannot bea cons piracy within the party itself, which consisted of several persons. Besides the Pott] and party, thero were other worshippers also, These worshippers were examined and they all state that they left the temple with the Potti and party and the temple was in tact when they left during the first week of Edavam. ‘The possibility of fire around the forest area enveloping: the temple and ihus bringing about the destruction of the temple is also out of the question, as there were no signs. of any such forest fire around the area, andi there were ample indications of a deliberate setting fire of the temple at the seene,‘The temple and surrounding building: 2s already mentioned raving been built of mostly non-inflammable materials, could not be easily -set fire to and on 4 modest calculation, the. pét- petrators could have worked wt this at least for four to five Hours continuously, as evidenced from the emptying of the ghee tins and utilising cloth and other materials to set fire to the temple. Further, there were signs of ocoupation of the temple premises by 2 party. They have madu yse of the pro- yisions that were stored in the temple including corriander. ‘These clearly show that great: labour has been undartaken dn committing this act. After having explained that theft was not the motive of thie offenders, the next point for consideration is to find out what lac is the motive and who could possibly heve that mative. From the examination of the scene of occurrence and attendant circumstanecs, it was possible to come to a conclusion that the offence was a deliberate one well conceived and executed. There was a touch of open vandalism and desecration was the only purpose. The breaking of the idol alter forcibly entering into the Sreekovil by cutting oper the door with an axe indi- tates ferocity. With this background, the whole point has to be viewed. With a view to find out which community had a motive, att unprejudiced view has to be taken and for thin pur- pose it should be possible to prove hy reasonable arguments that a particular community alone could have dene this. Assuming that the Hindus hsve done this. the réasotis for their doing and the reasons for their not doing it should be adduced, The following are the arguments to prove the complicity or otherwise of cach community. HINDUS: Before commencing # dise\yssion on this, it has to be stated that the offence was not committed by one man but only by @ group of persons. The reason for this ia that a single individual should have the courage to travel. through this dense forest area over a long distance, stay in the temple premises and commit the offence and return. This is an imyos- sibility. Moreover, the examination of the scene of occurrence has amply proved that the offence could not have: been com- mitted. by ane person and thal thore were signs of more than one person having occupied the temple premises. Further, the ¢ommission of ‘this offence requires knowledge and familiarity of the shrine aswell as of the route leading 1o the shrine. ‘The Saharimala Temple, as already described, is situated in the dense forests, Access Lo this femple fa through difficult