Sadhguru’s Isha Yoga Centre
On Friday, October 18, the Supreme Court dismissed a habeas corpus petition filed by a father who alleged that his two daughters, aged 42 and 39, were being illegally confined at Sadhguru’s Isha Yoga Centre in Coimbatore. The decision was based on the categorical statements from the two women, affirming that they are residing at the ashram of their own free will.
The Court, led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, criticized the Madras High Court’s decision to order a police investigation into other allegations against the ashram within the habeas corpus petition. “Since both are adults and the habeas corpus purpose was fulfilled, no further directions were necessary,” the bench noted.
Earlier, the Supreme Court had transferred the case from the Madras High Court after the latter’s order directing an inquiry into the ashram, which hosts over 5,000 residents. Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Isha Foundation, highlighted that the Tamil Nadu police’s status report confirmed that the two women were staying voluntarily. Rohatgi criticized the High Court for issuing further directives instead of closing the petition.
During the hearing, CJI Chandrachud stressed the court’s narrow jurisdiction in habeas corpus cases, saying, “These proceedings cannot be to malign people and institutions.” The court ultimately ruled that no further investigation was warranted in this matter, with the issue of habeas corpus now closed.
The father of the two women had originally filed the petition, claiming his daughters were being brainwashed at the ashram. However, after interacting with the monks, the Supreme Court found no evidence of coercion. The court noted that the women have freedom of movement, have seen their parents on multiple occasions, and even participated in a marathon, contradicting claims of confinement.
The Supreme Court clarified that while the habeas corpus petition is now closed, regulatory compliance issues within Isha Foundation remain unaffected, and the foundation committed to addressing any outstanding matters.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, supporting Rohatgi’s stance, cautioned that any further comments or orders might lead to “clickbait” news articles falsely implying an investigation was ordered against the institution. Ultimately, the Court restricted its ruling to the habeas corpus petition, refraining from commenting on broader issues raised by the High Court.
Refrence by :Live Law.in
Author:NTNDevelopers Home
