“I was deeply pained how Lenin made verbally and a written statement to the police of committing these criminals acts when filing a complaint against Paramahamsa Nithyananda. There was nothing done to arrest him even though his acts wereblatantly against the India law.. I was shocked and outraged when his verbal statement had Paramahamsa Nithyananda arrested for 53 days.”
Says Alice Loris alias. Ma Nithya Chandravimalananda
Lenin, the chief conspirator behind the Morphed video, that was solely aimed at defaming His Divine Holiness Paramahamsa Nithyananda and his Mission to revive Hinduism from its roots, spells out shamelessly that he and his co-conspirator made their way into the campus, into swamiji’s personal bedroom. Before we prove that he is one of the key conspirators behind the Defamation case flied against Paramahamsa Nithyananda- The young, powerful, influential and hope bringing master of Sanatana Hindu Dharma , Intruding onto someone’s privacy , tresspassing our campus looking completely normal and innocent to the naked eye without any permission, attempted a straight forward Privacy and security breach by placing a camera in someone’s bedroom, Selling and publicising obscene content that insullts the modelsty of a female are crimes sufficient enough to put the criminal behind bars for a good few years behind bars.
And evidence for all of this, the criminal himself writes in his FIR against Paramahamsa Nithyananda.
Yet, He manages to get away untouched by the court and the police.
Instead, one false statement made by Lenin, the chief conspirator, against Paramahamsa Nithyananda put swamiji behind bars for 53 days straight. Not considering Swamiji’s contribution to the world, the number of people moved by him, fed by him, healed by him, saved by him, the number of people dedicated their lives to him, one random baseless statement was empowered to put His Holiness behind bars.
A complaint was filed by Lori Espersen, Rajeswary Kunasegaran, Vijay Venkatraman, L Suryaprakash before the Court of the Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ramnagara informing that no action was taken by either Bidadi Police Station or Ramnagara Superintendent for the complaint and requesting the Magistrate to punish Lenin under sections 292, 509, 182, 505, 447, 448, 453, 456, U/s 67 of the IT Act 2000, and U/s 4 of the Indecent Representation of Women Act 1986. This was a case filed to register the crime of invasion of privacy as Lenin and Arthi as per their statement had admittedly placed a camera in the bedroom of Swami Nithyananda. The fact that the video was morphed is, on one hand, the fact but the statement by Lenin and Arathi Rao that they had put a camera in the bedroom itself is a direct admission of a crime.
Case was referred back to the Bidadi police station for interrogation and filing of FIR.
4 FIRS were filed. The case went into the hands of the CID. On 19 Feb 2011, the magistrate said that the police should submit an investigation report by March 25, failing which they will get a show cause notice. On 26 March 2011, the Magistrate issued show cause notice to PSI bidadi police station to report on May 10th about the status of the investigation on Lenin and on why they handed it over to the CID. On 10 May 2011, Bidadi PSI Vijay Kumar inspector was summoned, but he didn’t appear. Instead, Bidadi police sent a letter referring the investigation to CID. The court said that it was not right, and that the Bidadi PSI only has to do the investigation and submit the report by June 25 or it will be a contempt of court. Meanwhile, the CID filed a B-report.
