SC Constitutes SIT To Probe Allegations Of Adulteration In Tirupati Laddoo

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has constituted a five-member Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe into the allegations of adulterations in Tirupati temple prasadam laddoos.

Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan stated that the SC has not evaluated the merits of the allegations and counter-allegations. “We will not allow the Supreme Court to be used for political theatrics,” they remarked while dismissing all petitions.

The matter is of grave concern as sentiments of crores of devotees across the world are involved with Titupati prasadam, it said.

The SIT will replace the probe initiated by the Andhra Pradesh government. The SC-appointed SIT will include two CBI officers, two Andhra Pradesh police officers, and an officer from the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), with the CBI director supervising the investigation.

“FSSAI because they are the most expert apex body, in matters of testing food. Nobody can object to that. We don’t want this to turn into political drama. If there is an independent body, there will be confidence,” it added.

At 10.47 am, the SC began hearing a batch of petitions calling for a court-monitored investigation into allegations that animal fat was used in the preparation of laddoos served as prasadam at Sri Venkateswara Swamy Temple in Tirumala, Andhra Pradesh, dedicated to Lord Venkateshwara.

Solicitor General of India, Tushar Mehta, representing the central government, informed the SC that if the allegations hold any truth, they are unacceptable. He recommended that the Special Investigation Team (SIT) be overseen by senior central officials to ensure confidence and credibility in the investigation.

The Solicitor General also highlighted that the issue of food safety is significant, as devotees are spread across the country. He noted that there was nothing adverse found against the members of the current SIT.

Senior advocate Rohtagi clarified that the statement made in September, marking the government’s 100 days in office, was unrelated to the report in this case, which was released in July. He argued that the Chief Minister was specifically addressing the government’s 100-day milestone, and the media had taken a few lines from his speech out of context.