AP High Court Orders Twin Probes into Tirumala Theft, Questions Legality of Lok Adalat Settlement

VIJAYAWADA – The Andhra Pradesh High Court has initiated a sweeping judicial intervention into the handling of a theft case at the revered Tirumala temple, ordering parallel investigations by the Crime Investigation Department (CID) and the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB). The Court's order casts a harsh spotlight on significant procedural lapses by police, the trial court, and the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD) administration, while raising fundamental questions about the jurisdiction and propriety of settling such a case in a Lok Adalat.

In a comprehensive order issued on Monday, October 27, 2025, Justice Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad directed a Director General of Police (DGP)-rank officer from the CID to conduct a thorough probe into all facets of the alleged theft of devotee offerings, which occurred in 2023. The Court also tasked a DGP-rank officer from the ACB with a separate inquiry into the assets of the primary accused, C.V. Ravi Kumar, a TTD clerk.

The case, which has drawn public ire and condemnation from religious bodies like the Andhra Pradesh Sadhu Parishad, now transcends a simple theft investigation, evolving into a critical examination of institutional integrity and the sanctity of the judicial process.

The Genesis of the Case: Theft and a Questionable Compromise

The matter originated in April 2023 when C.V. Ravi Kumar, a supervisor at the Parakamani (the hall where offerings are counted) and an employee of the Jeeyar Mutt associated with TTD, was accused of stealing foreign currency worth approximately ₹72,000 (USD $920). Subsequent review of CCTV footage reportedly revealed repeated thefts amounting to over $11,000.

Despite the gravity of the offense—theft from the sacred offerings of one of the world's richest temples—the case did not proceed to a conventional criminal trial. Instead, it was settled in a Lok Adalat in September 2023. This "compromise" was reportedly facilitated after the accused and his family offered to donate seven immovable properties, valued at a staggering ₹14.50 crore, to the TTD. This settlement was later endorsed by the TTD board, a move that the Andhra Pradesh Sadhu Parishad decried as a "fraudulent compromise" designed to circumvent proper legal scrutiny.

High Court's Scathing Prima Facie Observations

Justice Ramakrishna Prasad's order meticulously deconstructs the procedural irregularities that plagued the case from its inception. The Court expressed strong prima facie disapproval of the failure by both the investigating officer and the presiding magistrate to invoke the appropriate legal provisions.

"Right at the stage of commencing the investigation itself, it is elementary on the part of the Investigating Officer and that it is incumbent on the part of the Judicial Officer at the stage of taking cognizance to ensure that the accused shall be charged under Section 409 of IPC," the Court noted. "In this regard, this Court is of the prima-facie opinion that there is a lapse on the part of the Investigating Officer as well as the Presiding Officer. In the opinion of this Court, this omission is a serious lapse."

The Court opined that the decision to press "charges of lesser consequence" was likely a deliberate move to facilitate the subsequent compromise in the Lok Adalat, as Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code—which pertains to criminal breach of trust by a public servant—is a serious, non-compoundable offense. The failure to apply this section, despite the accused being a public servant handling public (in this case, divine) property, was deemed a critical error.

Lok Adalat's Jurisdiction Under Judicial Microscope

A central legal question emerging from the High Court's order is the legality of the Lok Adalat's award settling the criminal case. Lok Adalats are designed for amicable dispute resolution, typically for compoundable offenses and civil matters. The settlement of a case involving potential non-compoundable charges and significant public interest has raised red flags.

Recognizing the constitutional and statutory gravity of this issue, Justice Prasad has directed the High Court Registry to furnish a copy of his order to the Chief Justice. The matter of the Lok Adalat award's legality is now set to be considered by a more authoritative Division Bench. This referral signals that the judiciary is poised to delineate the boundaries of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, ensuring they are not used to subvert the course of criminal justice, especially in matters of public trust.

A Multi-Pronged Investigation and Administrative Accountability

The Court has mandated a comprehensive, multi-agency investigation with a deadline of December 2, 2025, for the submission of initial reports.

1. CID Investigation: The CID has been directed to probe the entire affair, specifically scrutinizing the roles of the TTD Trust Board and its officers. The investigation will also examine the conduct of the de facto complainant, Assistant Vigilance and Security Officer Y. Satish Kumar, and the investigating officer in the original case. The CID is to submit its findings and recommended actions in a sealed cover.
2. ACB Investigation: The ACB's probe is focused on the financial profile of the accused, C.V. Ravi Kumar, and his family. The agency will investigate their movable and immovable assets, bank accounts, and property transactions to determine if they align with their known sources of income, implicitly probing for evidence of disproportionate assets.

In a significant move aimed at upholding judicial integrity, Justice Prasad also directed that the II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate of Tirupati, in whose court the original charge sheet was filed, "should be divested from all protocol duties with immediate effect."

The Court also highlighted a serious administrative lapse wherein the TTD Chairman accepted the ₹14.50 crore property donation from the accused on June 19, 2023, without a formal resolution from the TTD Board. This unilateral acceptance of a high-value donation from an individual accused of stealing from the institution he served has added another layer of complexity and suspicion to the case.

Broader Implications for Legal and Institutional Governance

This case is set to have far-reaching implications. For legal professionals, it serves as a stark reminder of the judiciary's power of oversight and the imperative for police and lower courts to apply the law meticulously, particularly at the cognizance stage. The impending review by a Division Bench on the Lok Adalat's role will be closely watched and could lead to new jurisprudence on the scope of alternative dispute resolution in criminal matters.

For institutions like the TTD, the case is a clarion call for enhanced transparency, accountability, and robust internal governance. The Court's directive to probe the role of the TTD board and its officials underscores that administrative bodies overseeing vast public and religious trusts are not immune from judicial scrutiny. As the twin investigations proceed, the legal and administrative communities await findings that could reshape procedural norms and reinforce the principle that justice must not only be done but be seen to be done, even when it concerns the coffers of the divine.