Addressing the media, the swami held up the photo and declared, ‘Look at this— the accuser and the investigator celebrating together. How can the public have faith in such a biased probe?’ He painted a vivid picture of the sequence of events, starting with the denial of bathing rights at the Sangam on February 18, followed by attacks on religious symbols.

‘That same day, ACP Sharma met us at noon by the Sangam, and Ashutosh Maharaj showed up in the evening to file a case. Two days on, they escalated to POCSO,’ the swami recounted. He dismissed the murder attempt FIR as untenable due to CCTV coverage on public roads and criticized police inaction when children were presented as witnesses. ‘POCSO demands immediate action—medical exams, FIRs—yet nothing happened until they went to court. This reeks of a setup.’

The incident has exposed deep fissures in law enforcement’s handling of religious disputes during the Magh Mela. Swami Avimukteshwaranand’s revelations have fueled calls for transparency, with many viewing the photo as damning evidence of impropriety. As political and religious leaders weigh in, the pressure is on authorities to address these allegations and restore public confidence in the justice system.

‘For 30 years, our pan-India body has championed saints’ causes on national issues,’ Gopalacharya stated. ‘The Shankaracharya throne represents the zenith of respect in Sanatan Dharma. Yogi ji is absolutely correct—no one can casually claim it.’

The controversy traces back to Swami Avimuktishwaranand Saraswati, whose comments on cow protection have fueled skepticism. ‘When a so-called Shankaracharya questions core tenets like gau hatya, it breeds suspicion,’ the swami observed. ‘While society has embraced him, authenticating his credentials is our collective responsibility. Tradition-bound devotees are anxious about his suitability.’

Gopalacharya urged reconciliation, praising Yogi’s dual role as a yogi-turned-leader. ‘Differences must be forgotten. With godless elements undermining our faith, saints and leaders need to unite against external threats rather than bicker internally.’

Swami Nirmal Das Maharaj chimed in, agreeing with Yogi on merits but cautioning against state interference. ‘Constitutionally and practically spot on, yet determining Shankaracharyas falls to expert councils like Kashi Vidwat Parishad, not governments.’

Reflecting on history, he mentioned the Akhilesh Yadav era’s use of force. ‘Perhaps they saw wrongdoing and acted per law, but today’s mishandling is unjustifiable.’

As the Magh Mela unfolds, this rift highlights tensions between modern politics and ancient spiritual orders, prompting calls for institutional mechanisms to resolve such disputes and safeguard Hinduism’s revered lineages.

Gyan Das Maharaj decried the administration’s aggressive response toward young devotees as unacceptable, warning it fosters splits in Hindu unity. ‘This is condemnable; action against the guilty is essential to mend our divided society,’ he stated, advocating for measures to prevent such divisive incidents in Sanatan Dharma.

From Varanasi, Swami Jitendra Saraswati offered a historical perspective, citing prior aggressions by bathuk groups against police. He justified security barricades during shahi snan, designed to maintain a clear 2-km perimeter for raths and restrict access to the snan zone.

In a provocative query, he challenged, ‘Why balk at a 50-meter walk? Such pride before Ganga Maa is unbecoming.’ Casting doubt on Avimukteshwaranand’s lineage to Shankaracharya, he pointed to the absence of any nominated successor post-Swaroopanand’s passing and court orders banning promotional banners. Swami Jitendra alleged a political plot, noting heavy presence of Congress and SP affiliates, urging the community to rise above such machinations for the sake of dharma.