"Gods should be kept away from politics": Supreme Court on 'Tirupati Prasadam' row

The Supreme Court was hearing a batch of petitions seeking court-monitored investigation into the allegations of use of animal fat to make laddus served as Prasadam at the Sri Venkateswara Swamy Temple in Tirumala.

The apex court asked the Andhra Pradesh government's counsel that when the lab reports indicated that the ghee used in consecrated sweet was subjected to testing what was the need for them to go to the press after it ordered SIT probe into it.

Till the outcome of SIT probe, what was the need to go to the press?, Supreme Court asked the Andhra Pradesh government.

The government, in response, said that it is investigating the issue, When the Supreme Court asked about the ghee which was not found in conformity, it was actually used for prasadam.

Supreme Court asked the Andhra Pradesh government about the proof that the contaminated ghee was used in the preparation of prasadam laddus.

Senior advocate Siddhartha Luthra appearing for for Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD) said that people complained that laddu did not taste right.

Supreme Court said the public was not aware of this, you have only given a statement. There is no proof that said contaminated ghee was used for prasadam.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the Supreme Court that this is a matter of faith. "If this ghee was used, it's unacceptable. It has to be seen who was responsible, and this needs to be examined."

Further, the Supreme Court asked Solicitor General that it would like him to examine whether an investigation should be conducted by a state-constituted SIT.

"Whether such a statement (by the state) should have been made that affects the sentiments of the devotees? What was the need of going to the press and making public statement when SIT was ordered?" SC asked the Andhra Pradesh government.

Prima facie, there is nothing to show at this stage that the ghee used in the sample was used for laddus, said Supreme Court.

Supreme Court's order says that the Solicitor General should assist it in deciding as to whether the SIT already appointed by the state government should continue or should the probe be conducted by an independent agency. (ANI)