Prayagraj Pocso Court Directs FIR Against Religious Leader Over Minor Exploitation Allegations
In a significant development, a Pocso court in Prayagraj has issued directives leading to the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) against Swami Avimukteshwaranand and his disciple, Mukudanand Brahmachari. The case pertains to allegations of sexual exploitation involving two minor boys at religious camps over the past year, including events during the recent Magh Mela and the upcoming 2025 Maha Kumbh in Prayagraj.
Court Order and Police Action
Pocso Judge Vinod Kumar Chaurasia ordered the Jhunsi police station to lodge a criminal case against the accused on Saturday. This order was based on a petition filed by Shankuri Peethadheshwar Ashutosh Maharaj, who is also a plaintiff in the Krishna Janmabhoomi–Shahi Eidgah title dispute. Besides Avimukteshwaranand and Mukundanand Brahmachari, the complaint names three unidentified individuals.
Station Officer Mahesh Mishra of Jhunsi confirmed that the FIR has been registered under section 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for criminal intimidation, along with sections 5, 6, 3, 4(2), 16, and 17 of the Pocso Act, which address various offenses related to sexual abuse of minors.
Allegations and Complainant's Account
Ashutosh Maharaj alleged that during a 'maha yajna' organized at his camp as part of the Magh Mela, two minor boys approached him with accusations against Avimukteshwaranand. They claimed that the swami, who proclaims himself to be a Shankaracharya, had sexually exploited them at his gurukul under the guise of education (shiksha) and service (sewa).
Further, Maharaj asserted that the exploitation extended to the 2025 Maha Kumbh, where both minors were allegedly assaulted. He stated that disciples of Avimukteshwaranand pressured the boys, framing it as "guru-sewa" and promising blessings in return. After receiving no response from Prayagraj police upon filing a complaint, Maharaj escalated the matter to the Pocso court.
Legal Proceedings and Court Findings
The court proceedings involved recording statements from the complainant and the two minors, as well as seeking a response from Avimukteshwaranand. Following hearings, the court reserved its order on February 14 and pronounced it on February 21.
Judge Chaurasia noted that the allegations reveal serious and specific instances of sexual assault, which prima facie constitute cognizable offenses under the Pocso Act and BNS. This underscores the gravity of the case and the legal imperative for police intervention.
The incident highlights ongoing concerns about child safety at large religious gatherings and the enforcement of protective laws like the Pocso Act in such contexts.
