Who is Chinnayya, the arrested ‘whistleblower’ in Dharmasthala case?

The so-called ‘whistle-blower’ in the Dharmasthala mass burial case, who earlier identified himself as ‘Bheem’, has now been revealed to be 'Chinnayya' following his arrest on Saturday (August 23).

A sanitation worker for 19 years

The man who earlier made a dramatic entry into a courtroom with a human skull in hand had worked as a sanitation worker in Dharmasthala for about 19 years, from 1995 to 2014. A photo taken 14 years ago while he was working as a sanitation worker in Dharmasthala has surfaced during the investigation.

Chinnayya is said to hail from Halligere in Mandya district. He was working in the local panchayat. Recently, locals told media persons that he had also worked ina brick factory. After that, he went to Dharmasthala, where he earned his livelihood by collecting garbage and cleaning bathrooms. It is said that he returned to his village about five years ago.

Chinnayya reportedly fled Dharmasthala following an incident of violence against his daughter in 2014 and was hiding in Tamil Nadu.

Also Read: Dharmasthala case: ‘Mass burial’ complainant arrested

Wife dubbed him ‘mentally unstable’

He is said to have lived with his wife for seven years in a house near the Netravati River, close to Dharmasthala. Hailing from Mandya, his wife accused Chinnayya of abandoning her after having an illicit relationship with a woman from Tamil Nadu.

Her claims that Chinnayya is mentally unstable and has a history of fabricating false stories to attract people's attention dealt a serious blow to his credibility. She further alleged that Chinnayya had made the entire drama out of hunger for publicity.

Although he initially approached the South Kannada District Police Chief’s office with a team of lawyers, there is no specific information available about who is providing legal support to Chinnayya.

During the investigation, the names of civil rights activists Mahesh Shetty Thimarody and Girish Mattannavar have cropped up as well.

Also Read: Charges of multiple murders in Dharmasthala 'baseless', says Dharmadhikari Heggade

Centre of media glare

Nevertheless, Chinnayya, who appeared as an anonymous complainant at the beginning of the case, was considered a 'witness' and was provided protection under the Witness Protection Act by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) that is probing the case.

Chinnayya became the centre of media glare when he approached the South Kannada District Police Chief through his lawyers as a masked individual named 'Bheem'. He made explosive claims that he had buried hundreds of corpses in the forest area of Dharmasthala.

He then ascended the court steps holding a human skull as evidence of his statement. In front of media cameras, he proclaimed, "I have buried the dead with my own hands. I fear for my life, but the truth must come out. The guilty must be punished." his words spread like wildfire, shocking the entire state. His claims created immense pressure on the government.

Also Read: Dharmasthala case: Real probe will begin after DNA sample analysis, says Karnataka govt

Karnataka govt sets up SIT

The Karnataka government set up a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the case. Based on the information provided by Chinnayya (then Bheem), the investigation commenced under the leadership of SIT chief Pranab Mohanty. Heavy police presence was deployed to excavate graves at around 17 locations indicated by Chinnayya. The search operation, which lasted for days, was closely monitored by the entire state.

However, after several days of effort, only a few human bones and skeletal parts were found at just two locations, said Home Minister G. Parameshwara during a session of the Legislative Assembly. Chinnayya’s credibility came under the scanner. Police sources have revealed that a thread of suspicion emerged from his statements.

Also Read: Karnataka BJP’s ‘Dharmasthala Chalo’ sparks political showdown with Congress

The rise of 'Bheem' in national media

As the SIT was probing the case, Chinnayya, as a masked individual, had reached out to the national media. He portrayed himself as a victim fighting for the truth, a lone warrior standing against the system. Repeatedly stating that his life was in danger and that he needed protection for himself and his family.

He alleged that there were powerful political and influential figures behind the case. Observers of this case believe that these continuous interviews and statements have garnered him public sympathy and created an image of a whistleblower.

Also Read: Dharmasthala case: Sujatha releases missing daughter Ananya's photo

When his luck ran out

When expected evidence was not found at the locations indicated by Chinnayya, SIT officials reportedly changed the direction of their investigation. They proceeded to verify his background, intentions, and the truthfulness of his statements. During interrogation, police sources revealed that there were inconsistencies in his statements and many fabricated stories.

However, the question remains: What was Chinnayya's intention? Was it a property dispute, personal enmity, or were there other influential people at work behind him? These will be probed by the SIT.

(The story was first published in the Federal Karnataka)