Inside Dharmasthala panchayat’s burial records

Bengaluru

When activist T. Jayanth filed a Right to Information (RTI) request seeking details of unclaimed bodies buried in Dharmasthala between 1994 and 2014, he expected a simple accounting of deaths: police references, dates, and burial details.

What he received instead were bundles of burial vouchers and expense ledgers from the Dharmasthala Gram Panchayat. At first glance, they looked routine: names of men who supposedly dug graves, signatures of those workers, and entries of expenses reimbursed.

But a closer look raised troubling questions. Nearly every voucher appeared to be written in the same handwriting, regardless of the year. Even more suspicious, the signatures of different workers matched that very handwriting. Forensic experts, say journalists, would likely find the documents riddled with forgeries.

Senior journalist S C Dinesh Kumar, who studied the papers for his Dinoo Talks channel calls it “a burial system on paper that does not reflect what really happened on the ground.” Based on his analysis https://eedina.com/ ( a kannada news portal) also carried a report. 

It should be noted that the State government formed a Special Investigation Team (SIT) on July 19 after Chinnayya filed a complaint alleging that he was forced to bury bodies around Dharmasthala village. 

The missing gravedigger

No name is more glaring in its absence than that of Chinnayya, a sanitation worker from Dharmasthala. Chinnayya who was witness-complainant in Dharmasthala mass burial case is now accused for perjury and forgery of evidence. He allegedly lied about the skull he brought. 

In multiple interviews, Chinnayya has admitted to burying “hundreds of bodies” during his years of service. “I even know where many of them lie,” he said in one recorded testimony, offering to identify graves.

Locals confirm his account. “We have all seen Chinnayya dig the pits,” said a shopkeeper near Dharmasthala. “When an unknown body came, he and a few others would be called,” he said.

Yet his name is nowhere in the official vouchers. Instead, the records list names of other workers—some of them street sweepers, some daily-wage labourers. Many of them could not sign their names, villagers insist, yet the vouchers carry perfect signatures attributed to them.

Orders from elsewhere

Another inconsistency lies in who actually directed the burials. The panchayat’s vouchers suggest a formal system: the police inform the panchayat, which authorises burial, and workers carry it out.

But testimonies say otherwise. “I never got messages from the Gram Panchayat,” Chinnayya recalled. “The calls always came from the temple information office.”

A second worker identified as Raju speaking on Suvarna TV, confirmed the same: “When an unclaimed body came, we got a call from the information center. I am often buried alongside Chinnayya. He would sometimes take the jewelry from the bodies.”

Though the theft allegation remains unproven, both accounts make one fact clear—the burial orders did not come from the panchayat. Yet, on paper, the Gram Panchayat claimed responsibility for every case.

The haste of death

Perhaps most disturbing is the speed with which the bodies were disposed of. Official rules require unclaimed bodies to be preserved for at least 72 hours, often longer, to allow relatives a chance to claim them. In case of minors, young women, or suspicious deaths, additional caution is mandatory. But Dharmasthala’s records show a pattern of immediate burials.

On November 23, 2010, an unclaimed body was found near the Netravathi bathing ghat. The very next day, another body surfaced near the main entrance of Dharmasthala. On the 25th, a third body was discovered near Kalleri. Three bodies in three days, each quickly buried, with no investigation into identity.

Clusters like this appear repeatedly. In May 2011, three bodies were found within a week: a woman from the river, another near the temple gate, and a man who hanged himself in the forest. Each was treated as routine and buried under panchayat vouchers.

Even when partial identity was known, haste prevailed. In 2014, a woman named Jayamma was found dead near the Netravati bridge. Her address was noted. Yet the records still list her as an “unclaimed body,” and she was buried without notifying relatives.

A Murder, A cremation

The most shocking case in the records is dated April 7, 2010.

On April 6, 2010, two bodies were recorded: one, a man who collapsed and died at a ground near Dharmasthala temple; another, a 35–40-year-old woman found murdered inside a guesthouse room at Sharavathi lodging.

Instead of burial, her body was cremated. The voucher says “burial,” but in brackets, someone has added the word “cremation.”

She had a room booked in her name. How can such a woman be called unclaimed? And if it was murder, why cremate her? What evidence was lost in the fire? These questions remain unanswered. No follow-up investigation is traceable in the documents.

Children among the unclaimed

Several of the records involve children, their stories lost in the rush of disposal.

On June 15, 2009, the body of a 15-year-old girl was found. She was buried the same day. No attempt to trace her parents is documented.

On September 2, 2009, a man and a 10–12-year-old girl were found together at the Netravati dam. Villagers suspected they were father and daughter. But again, the bodies were buried swiftly, with no effort to trace the mother or relatives.

“Which 15-year-old child has no parents?” asked a social worker from Belthangady. “Even if she ran away or was lost, someone would have been looking. To bury her in a hurry is not procedure—it is concealment.”

Only vouchers, no evidence

The panchayat maintains no police mahajars, no post-mortem reports, and no photographs. The only documentation consists of vouchers listing payments and the names of men who allegedly buried the bodies.

Each voucher carries a “bill number.” Strikingly, over two decades, the handwriting remains the same. In several instances, the name written on the voucher matches the handwriting of the signature below it—an impossible coincidence if multiple workers were involved.

“It looks like one person filled everything—name, role, and signature,” said journalist Dinesh Kumar. “If handwriting experts examine these papers, forgery will be undeniable.”

A hidden system

Taken together, the testimonies and records suggest a parallel system of handling the dead. The official documents show one version: the panchayat ordered, the workers buried, the payments cleared.

But eyewitnesses and workers say another version: calls came from the temple office, Chinnayya and a few others dug the graves, and the panchayat later produced paperwork that bore little resemblance to reality.

The consistency of handwriting, the forged signatures, the absence of key names, the rushed burials, and the occasional cremations of even murder victims—each adds weight to the suspicion that the documents were not sloppy but deliberate, designed to erase evidence while maintaining the illusion of procedure.

The silence of the dead

For two decades, unclaimed bodies passed through Dharmasthala in silence—some children, some women, some known but treated as nameless. They were buried or burned, and the papers filed away.

Today, the records themselves have become evidence—not of closure, but of concealment. As one villager put it: “The ground here hides many secrets. Now the papers do too.”