Swami Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati Magh Mela Incident: PIL Before Allahabad HC Seeks CBI Probe

A letter petition has been filed before the Allahabad High Court seeking a court-monitored investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation into an incident that allegedly took place on January 18, 2026 during the Magh Mela at Prayagraj. The plea alleges custodial violence against minor children and interference with religious practices in connection with an episode involving Swami Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati, Shankaracharya of Jyotish Peeth.

Filed by Advocate Gaurav Dwivedi, the Public Interest Litigation plea relates to events that allegedly took place on January 18, coinciding with Mauni Amavasya, considered the most sacred bathing day of the Magh Mela.

The petitioner has alleged that the police administration arbitrarily obstructed the seer’s movement to the Sangam, leading to disruption of religious rituals and custodial violence against juveniles accompanying him.

According to the petition, Swami Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati was proceeding towards the Sangam in a palanquin along with his disciples and followers when the police stopped the palanquin and compelled him to proceed on foot. The plea alleges that the intervention resulted in confrontation, damage to the palanquin, and physical manhandling of disciples, which disrupted the religious observance.

The petitioner has further alleged that during the incident, several Brahmin batuks aged between 11 and 14 years were detained by the police, assaulted, and beaten in custody. It is claimed that the children fall within the definition of juveniles under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, and that their detention in police custody itself was illegal.

The plea alleges violation of statutory safeguards under the Juvenile Justice Act, including provisions that prohibit placement of children in police lock-ups and mandate protection of their dignity, safety, and best interests. It further claims that the alleged custodial violence attracts penal provisions under the Act, including punishment for cruelty to a child and liability of public servants for contravention of statutory duties.

The petition also alleges that during the incident, sacred shikhas of batuks and saints were pulled, which, according to the petitioner, amounted to humiliation of Sanatan religious symbols and practices, causing hurt to religious sentiments.

Subsequently, the petition states, the Magh Mela administration issued a notice questioning the right of Swami Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati to use the title of “Shankaracharya of Jyotish Peeth,” citing the pendency of a dispute before the Supreme Court. The petitioner has argued that even if a succession dispute is pending, it is ecclesiastical in nature and does not authorise administrative interference in religious observances or humiliation of a seer.

The plea further refers to a report published in the national daily Patrika on January 28, 2026, which stated that Swami Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati announced his decision to leave the Magh Mela without performing the Magh Snan. According to the report, the seer described returning from the holy site without bathing as an extremely painful and unimaginable moment. A copy of the news report has been annexed with the petition.

The petitioner has alleged that the incident led to peaceful protests by the seer and his followers, and that on January 24, 2026, attempts were made by certain elements to forcibly enter his camp, creating law and order concerns.

Claiming violation of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 25 of the Constitution, the petition has sought directions for suspension of the Prayagraj Commissioner, District Magistrate, Police Commissioner and the Magh Mela Adhikari. It has also sought a CBI investigation into the January 18 incident, registration of FIRs against erring police officials under the Juvenile Justice Act, and directions to safeguard religious freedom and prevent custodial violence against children.

The matter is yet to be listed before the court.

Case Title: Advocate Gaurav Dwivedi vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others