Actor and activist Prakash Raj on Wednesday, June 16 addressed the media to respond to allegations made against him in a writ petition filed before the Karnataka High Court by Chinnaiah CN, the complainant in the Dharmasthala alleged mass burial case.
In his petition, Chinnaiah alleged that activist Girish Mattannavar had called Prakash Raj one night and handed him the phone, and that Prakash Raj had spoken to him in Tamil, asking him to give a statement to authorities as instructed by Mattannavar, and that he would come and "hug" him on the 29th.
Prakash Raj denied the characterisation. He said he had received a call from Girish Mattannavar, who told him that a man wanted to speak with him. "I get calls from people for various reasons. I answer," he said. He said the man—who he was told was from Mandya—began speaking in Tamil, which struck him as unusual, and that he asked the man why he was speaking to him instead of the SIT, which had already been constituted. Prakash Raj said the man told him he did not have the courage to approach the SIT. He said he then asked the man to record and send a voice note rather than meet him. The man complied immediately, he said.
Prakash Raj said he then called his lawyer, following which he contacted SIT chief Pranab Mohanty, shared the information and took an appointment to meet him in person. "Mohanty said thank you for the information, this will be investigated," he said. He added that when he followed up with Mohanty a few days later, he was told that Chinnaiah had begun reversing his statements.
Prakash Raj said his involvement in the matter was limited to urging the government to form an SIT after reports emerged about the alleged burials. "I am a social activist. Based on reports, I urged the government to form an SIT and investigate," he said. He said he had tweeted in support of Mohanty's appointment, calling it good news. He said he had never visited Dharmasthala and had never previously met Girish Mattannavar. He also referred to allegations that Rs 200 crore had been invested to defame Dharmasthala, which he said had been attributed to him without basis.
"I am a citizen of this country. I have the right to question," he said, adding that the SIT has now submitted its report.
Separately, N Rama Nagaraj, a Chitradurga-based social worker named in Chinnaiah's petition, strongly denied the allegations. She said she had never met Chinnaiah, never spoken to him and had no dealings with him, describing his claim that she had funded a conspiracy to disturb Dharmasthala as completely false.
In his petition, Chinnaiah had claimed that once activists realised he would give a statement against Shree Kshethra Dharmasthala, Dr D Veerendra Heggade and his family members, they disclosed that they received funds from Kerala and that their major source of income was Rama Nagaraj from Chitradurga. He further alleged that Girish Mattannavar and Mahesh Shetty Thimarodi were in regular contact with Nagaraj and that “she used to send funds to them to bring disturbance to the sanctity of Shree Kshethra Dharmasthala.”
Nagaraj said she intended to file an application to be impleaded in the case before the High Court. She pointed out that the claims made in Chinnaiah's petition did not appear in any of his earlier statements — in his initial complaint, before the magistrate, before the SIT, or during bail proceedings.
She also said she had filed a police complaint in Davanagere alleging that persons connected to the SKDRDP had surrounded and abused her in public and threatened her life.
Nagaraj cited Chinnaiah's own bail application before a Mangaluru court on November 11, 2025, in which he had, through a state-appointed legal-aid advocate, sworn that he had come forward voluntarily, that his original complaint of July 3, 2025 was true, and that three bodies had been recovered owing to his efforts. She requested the High Court to summon Chinnaiah in person to verify his own affidavit.
Background and HC petition
Chinnaiah had originally alleged in a complaint filed at Dharmasthala police station on July 3, 2025, that he had buried hundreds of bodies—mostly of women and girls allegedly sexually assaulted—at the site. A case was registered on July 4, 2025, and he recorded a statement before the JMFC court in Belthangady on July 11, 2025. The SIT carried out excavations at multiple locations identified by him.
Chinnaiah subsequently changed his statement, claiming he had buried ten bodies, including that of a woman who had suffered burn injuries. He was arrested by the SIT on August 23, 2025.
In his writ petition before the Karnataka High Court, Chinnaiah has sought directions to the SIT to complete its probe and submit a final report in July 3 FIR registered at Dharmasthala police station. He has also sought directions for the SIT to act on individuals named in a preliminary inquiry report dated November 19, 2025, and on a complaint he submitted on December 18, 2025.
The petition has been filed against the state government, the Superintendent of Police Dakshina Kannada, the SIT chief and the SHO of Dharmasthala police station. The Karnataka High Court has issued notices to the state government and the SIT seeking information on the status of the investigation. The matter is posted for further hearing on June 29.