Sabarimala gold theft case: Kerala HC dismisses bail plea of Pankaj Bhandari, CEO of Smart Creations

The Kerala High Court has dismissed the bail plea of Pankaj Bhandari, the CEO of Smart Creations, Chennai, in connection with the case related to the alleged misappropriation of gold from the Sabarimala temple.

He had been arraigned as the ninth and 12th accused in two cases registered in this regard. The CEO of the firm, where the Dwarapalaka idols and the door frames were taken for gold plating, had been charged by the SIT probing the case with holding a secret meeting in Bengaluru after the case came up for hearing in the High Court in October 2025. The others in the meeting reportedly included the prime accused Unnikrishnan Potti and Bellari-based jeweller Govardhan. They discussed the possible course of action in case they were implicated in the case, which the SIT termed a bid to destroy evidence. All this was confirmed based on their cellphone records, the SIT had mentioned in its report.

Mr. Bhandari was arrested on December 19. He contended that his arrest was against the norms prescribed by the Supreme Court and that none of his family members or friends were informed immediately after the arrest. The arrest was illegal, since his fundamental and statutory rights as explained by the apex court have been violated. Moreover, the written grounds of arrest were required to be furnished to him on his arrest, in a case where the police were in prior possession of documentary material, he added.

The government responded that the written communication of the grounds of arrests were given to him and Rajasekhar, his staff member, well in advance as mandated by law on the same day and about five hours before his production before the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge Court, Kollam.

A Bench of Justice A. Badharudeen observed that the grounds of arrest were communicated in the language (English) known to the accused – Mr. Bhandari. Therefore, non-supply of the remand report again to inform the grounds of arrest to the accused is not necessary. The only anomaly that could be seen from the proceedings adopted by the arresting officer is that he the accused was produced before the Special Court after a delay of about two hours, obviously for the time taken for medical examination and travelling from Thiruvananthapuram to Kollam (71 km).

The court added that the same by itself is not a reason to declare the arrest as illegal. The non-compliance argued by the petitioner is insufficient to declare the arrest as illegal, and in consequence thereof, this petition would necessarily fail, it observed, and went on to dismiss his bail plea.