Court accepts Vigilance finding that no individual criminal liability could be fixed in alleged misappropriation of Adiyashishtam Ghee sale proceeds, but directs disciplinary action, recovery steps and a detailed SOP with digital monitoring, CCTV and professional management measures.
The Kerala High Court has declined to proceed with criminal prosecution in the alleged misappropriation of sale proceeds from Adiyashishtam Ghee packets at Sabarimala, after Vigilance authorities reported that the available materials were insufficient to fix individual criminal liability or establish a conspiracy among the persons involved.
A Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar was hearing DBAR No. 1 of 2026 and SSCR No. 3 of 2026 arising from reports concerning the alleged loss of Rs. 17,14,460 to the Travancore Devaswom Board during the Mandala-Makaravilakku season of 2025-26. The case had earlier been registered as Vigilance Case No. VC 02/2026/PTA under provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
The Court noted that the Vigilance inquiry revealed serious lapses in the production, storage, transit, distribution and sale of the ghee packets, but the records contained discrepancies and did not permit a definite conclusion that any particular employee had dishonestly misappropriated the money. The report also stated that there was no material to show a conspiracy between the packing contractor, counter sales staff, Temple Special Officers and the Executive Officer.
Accepting the final Vigilance report dated 22.09.2026, the Bench held that criminal prosecution was not warranted on the materials presently available and directed the Vigilance to proceed accordingly. At the same time, the Court made it clear that the conduct of the officials was serious and that the Travancore Devaswom Board may consider disciplinary proceedings against all employees arrayed as accused, along with steps to recover the loss sustained by the Board.
The judgment goes beyond the immediate criminal aspect and lays strong emphasis on systemic reform. The Court found that the existing arrangement at Sannidhanam suffered from weak supervision and poor accountability. It highlighted that inexperienced newly recruited staff were being deployed at sales counters, that one staff member was handling both ticket issuance and ghee packet distribution, and that the storage tanks lacked proper calibration and visible markings.
To prevent recurrence, the Court had already directed the Board to implement a detailed set of safeguards, including clearly defining duties and accountability, specifying duty periods and counters, stopping the deployment of inexperienced staff in sensitive roles, separating ticket issuance from packet distribution, calibrating storage tanks, installing a digital flow meter, maintaining separate registers, conducting regular stock verification, computerising operations, enabling digital tracking through portals, and installing high-definition CCTV cameras with footage retention for at least ninety days.
The Court also directed the Travancore Devaswom Board to examine a procedure reportedly prepared by the Executive Officer, Sabarimala, and to formulate a comprehensive Standard Operating Procedure within three weeks. The SOP must incorporate the Court’s directions and the Executive Officer’s suggestions, and clearly spell out responsibilities, supervision, stock verification, accounting, digital tracking and accountability.
In a broader observation, the Bench remarked that the scale of administration at Sannidhanam, which caters to more than one lakh devotees daily during the pilgrimage season, requires specialised managerial, administrative, technical and supervisory skills. The Court therefore urged the Board to seriously consider engaging qualified professionals on a contractual basis and to seek training support from institutions such as the Centre for Management Studies or the Indian Institute of Management for senior officers.
The matter has been posted for the Travancore Devaswom Board’s response on 23.10.2026.
Bottom Line :
Devaswom administration - Alleged misappropriation in sale proceeds of Adiyashishtam Ghee packets at Sabarimala - Vigilance unable to fix individual criminal liability or establish conspiracy on available materials - Criminal prosecution not warranted - Court accepted Vigilance report, permitted disciplinary action and recovery measures, and directed formulation of detailed SOP with accountability, stock verification, digital tracking, CCTV surveillance and professional management reforms.
Statutory provision(s): Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Kerala Civil Services (Vigilance Tribunal) Rules, 1960
Joint Director v. Secretary, (Kerala)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2985295
