The Dharmasthala “mass burial” case has seen yet another twist after it fell apart. Sujata Bhat, a Karnataka elderly woman, had previously stated that her daughter went missing in Dharmasthala, a temple town in Dakshina Kannada district. Her narrative initially stoked the controversy surrounding reports of sexual assault and clandestine burials.
However, after the investigation and excavation by SIT found that there was no evidence of any mass burial, recently she said that that her daughter, MBBS student Ananya Bhat, never existed.
Now, as per a report by NDTV, she has made another U-turn, saying she was pressured into denying her daughter’s existence.
“It’s true, I have a daughter. The YouTube channel made me say that forcibly,” she said when asked why she had earlier dismissed her own claim. This contradictory testimony has once again left the case clouded in confusion.
A row of changing statements
At first, Sujata Bhat had said that her daughter, 18-year-old medical student Ananya Bhat, went missing in Dharmasthala in May 2003. She even filed a complaint with the police after the ‘masked man’ CN Chinnayya claimed that he was forced to burry the bodies of hundreds of women and minor girls after their rape and murder at Dharmasthala.
However, those claims have been proven false, after which she told a YouTuber that Ananya never existed. In an interview to a YouTube channel InsightRush, Sujata claimed that she made the false claims because she had a grouse that her grandfather’s ancestral property was given away without her signature. She had said, “Girish Mattannavar and others provoked me and made me claim that my daughter had gone missing in Dharmasthala,” and apologised for making false claims.
And now, she has changed her stand yet again, saying she was pressured into giving a false statement that she never had a daughter. She said that the channel InsightRush made her say that.
Her changing claims have added confusion to a case already surrounded by mystery. Earlier in the day, the key figure in the controversy, CN Chinnayya (better known as Chenna or the “masked man”), was arrested by the Special Investigation Team (SIT). He had initiated the case and said that hundreds of women and young girls were killed and buried in Dharmasthala, but investigators now say he fabricated the story.
The SIT withdrew his witness protection after cross-questioning and arrested him for perjury.
Political showdown follows explosive claims
Chenna’s sensational charges caused a political firestorm in Karnataka. The government, however, accused the BJP of trying to derive political mileage from the issue and assured action against whoever has broken the law. The Dharmasthala family themselves met the Chief Minister and said that we are doing a good job, said Deputy Chief Minister DK Shivakumar.
What Sujata Bhat said on Friday
Adding to the confusion, Sujata Bhat had made a very different statement just a day earlier, on Friday, 22nd August. While speaking to a YouTube channel, she confessed that she never had a daughter named Ananya Bhat. She claimed that activists Girish Mattannavar and T Jayanti had brainwashed her into lying as part of a campaign against Dharmasthala.
She said she was told to create a story that her daughter, an 18-year-old medical student, had disappeared from the temple town in 2003. In her earlier statements, she had even described being kidnapped, assaulted and kept in a hospital in Bengaluru, where she was in a coma. On Friday, however, she admitted it was all fabricated.
“There was never any daughter named Ananya Bhat,” she said, adding that the picture circulated as her daughter’s was fake too. She explained that she was dragged into the false narrative due to a property dispute between the temple administration and her grandfather.
Bhat’s apology to the people of Karnataka
Sujata Bhat also issued an emotional apology. “Yes, for the people of Karnataka, for the devotees of Dharmasthala…I ask the people of this state, and the whole country, to forgive me…” Bhat said, making it clear that she had not been paid nor requested to pay money to give her statement. She requested devotees of Dharmasthala and the public of Karnataka to forgive her for offending their religious feelings.
In the meantime, the Special Investigation Team on Friday (22nd August) directed Sujatha Bhat to appear before its office in Belthangady.
What the SIT found so far
As the allegations gained traction, the SIT launched an extensive investigation. Beginning on 29th July, the team dug up several sites pointed out by Chenna, who had claimed he buried victims there. Out of 13 sites identified, five were excavated by 30th July, but no remains of women were found. On 31st July, some human bones were recovered from a sixth site, but officials confirmed they belonged to a man. Around 15 bones were found in total, though no skull was recovered.
Investigators also came across a debit card belonging to a woman and a PAN card belonging to a man. Upon tracing the PAN card, it was discovered that it belonged to a man named Suresh from Nelamangala taluk. His father attested that Suresh was an alcoholic and passed away due to jaundice in March 2025.
The Origins of the Controversy
The case began when Chenna, claiming to be a former sanitation worker at the Lord Manjunatha shrine in Dharmasthala, approached police on 3rd June. He said that between 1995 and 2014, he was forced to bury the bodies of women and minor girls. To support his claim, he produced skeletal remains, he said he had exhumed.
A week later, he appeared in court fully covered, reaffirming his claims. Given the seriousness of the allegations, the Karnataka government ordered the formation of an SIT on 19th July. Chenna then provided 13 supposed burial sites, which led to the excavation drive.
But as site after site yielded nothing, the case began to unravel. Even the skull Chenna had submitted to the court was tested at two hospitals and confirmed to belong to a man who had died about 30 years ago. At the final site, where Chenna had claimed up to 100 bodies were buried 16 feet underground, Ground Penetrating Radar found nothing. When the site was dug up, again, no remains were discovered.