Supreme Court Dismisses Petition Against Isha Foundation, Affirms Voluntary Residence of Women

Supreme Court dismisses petition claiming illegal confinement of two daughters at Isha Foundation

A habeas corpus petition was filed by Dr. S Kamaraj, a retired professor, claiming that his two daughters, Geetha and Latha , were being held against their will at the Isha Foundation’s ashram in Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu. Dr. Kamaraj requested the court to direct the ashram to produce his daughters, alleging that they were being detained illegally.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court bench, led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and including Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, reviewed the petition and statements made by the two women. The bench noted that both daughters were adults and had voluntarily chosen to stay at the Isha Foundation’s ashram. They stated that they were free to leave whenever they wished and were residing there without any pressure or coercion.

The court emphasized that since the women confirmed their voluntary residence, the petition for habeas corpus—an order used to determine whether a person is being detained unlawfully—no longer held relevance. The bench observed that no further action was needed in this specific case, leading to the closure of the habeas corpus proceedings.

Read More: US Identifies Key Figure in Plot to Assassinate Pro-Khalistan Leader Pannun

Police Investigation Finds No Evidence of Illegal Detention

In line with an October 3 order from the Supreme Court, the Tamil Nadu police conducted an investigation into the allegations. A status report submitted to the bench confirmed that there was no evidence to support Dr. Kamaraj’s claims of illegal confinement. The investigation was initially ordered by the Madras High Court on September 30, following the petition.

Read More: Supreme Court Dismisses Case Against Isha Foundation

Solicitor General’s and Senior Advocates’ Submissions

During the proceedings, Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra, representing the State of Tamil Nadu, requested the bench to specify that closing the habeas corpus petition would not prevent the police from investigating other ongoing cases. However, Mukul Rohatgi, representing the Isha Foundation, opposed this suggestion, arguing that such remarks could be misused by individuals with vested interests to target the institution. Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta supported Rohatgi, cautioning that any unnecessary observation could lead to misleading news reports suggesting that the Supreme Court had ordered an investigation against the Isha Foundation.

The bench ultimately agreed, stating in its order that the only issue addressed was the habeas corpus petition, and that aspect of the matter would remain closed. It clarified that the closure of this specific case does not affect any other potential regulatory investigations or requirements for the ashram.

Read More:

 Chief Justice Questions Intentions of Petitioner’s Counsel

During the hearing, Chief Justice Chandrachud expressed doubts about the intentions of Dr. Kamaraj’s counsel, questioning whether he was representing a political agenda or genuinely advocating for the interests of Dr. Kamaraj’s daughters. The CJI’s remarks indicated skepticism about the motivations behind the petition, suggesting that the case might have been influenced by factors beyond genuine concern for the two women.

The Supreme Court’s dismissal of the habeas corpus petition against the Isha Foundation confirms that Geetha and Latha are voluntarily residing at the ashram. The court reiterated that no evidence supports the claim of illegal confinement. However, it reminded the Isha Foundation of its duty to comply with regulatory standards, particularly concerning the safety and rights of women and minors residing at its premises.