Tirupati Laddu Row: What the SIT report finally says | LME 113

Let’s imagine a statement being made repeatedly 

Everyone is saying it

Politicians are shouting it

The Media is amplifying it 

The messages are all over your whatsapp and social media 

And the outrage is just building up around you

And you end up believing it 

Then a year later

It is clear that this was a lie 

A manipulation meant to create divisions 

That’s what is happening with the Tirupati laddu and ghee controversy 

For months, it was proposed that animal fat such as beef tallow, pig fat, or fish oil were mixed into the ghee used to prepare the laddu–the sacred prasadam

But lab findings from two of India’s leading dairy science institutions have found the exact opposite 

There was no animal fat in the ghee.

The chargesheet in the case shows just how easy it is to draw conclusions and manipulate people 

Let me explain 

But before we go ahead, a quick thought.

This story is a good example of how complicated issues can get flattened very quickly — especially when politics, religion, and television shouting matches collide.

From the day this controversy broke, we were careful.

In fact our first report quoted scientists 

And now 

We chose to go through the full chargesheet, speak to scientists, and try to understand what the lab reports were actually saying.

That kind of reporting takes time, and it isn’t always the loudest.

But it’s important, as misinformation can hurt people and deepen mistrust.

If you value this kind of careful, independent journalism, do support The News Minute.

Like Pooja’s LME? Support the show: https://rzp.io/rzp/support-lme

If you are watching from abroad, click this link:https://buy.stripe.com/28o01q9md0OPdtm8wR

Now, here’s the first thing that was misrepresented 

The ghee that was tested was never used to make the laddus.

These were samples rejected by the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam itself, drawn from tankers in the supply chain, as confirmed by the TTD’s Executive Officer.

So no one knows if devotees ever ended up

Eating laddus with adulterated ghee 

So what exactly was tested, and who tested it?

The SIT chargesheet refers to two government institutions.

One is the ICAR National Dairy Research Institute in Karnal.

The other is NDDB CALF, the Centre for Analysis and Learning in Livestock under the National Dairy Development Board in Anand.

These are specialised labs that deal with dairy science, milk fat chemistry, and livestock analysis.

At the ICAR institute, the samples were tested using a PCR-based method.

PCR is a molecular technique that looks for species-specific DNA.

In simple terms, it can tell you whether biological traces from a particular animal are present.

The conclusion here is unambiguous.

Lard was not detected in any of the four samples.

Lard is pig fat.

One of the loudest allegations was that pork fat had been mixed into ghee meant for prasadam.

This test did not find it.

The second set of findings came from NDDB CALF, which analysed the chemical and fatty acid profile of the samples.

One key marker they looked for was cholesterol.

Animal fats contain cholesterol.

Plant oils do not.

The report states that cholesterol was not detected in the samples of ghee from TTD.

The report goes on to say that because cholesterol is absent, the chances of the presence of beef tallow, lard, or fish oil are “very low”.

Some politicians and TV debates have clung to those words — “very low” — as if they leave the door open to animal fat.

But this is how scientific language works.

Labs deal in probability, not political certainty.

They avoid absolute claims unless something is conclusively detected.

What matters is the reason behind that phrase.

No cholesterol means no presence of animal fat.

That is the science.

To understand this better, our reporter Anjana Meenakshi shared the lab findings with veterinary scientist Dr Sagari Ramdas.

She was clear about what the report actually means.

The absence of cholesterol, she explained, indicates that animal fats like lard, beef tallow, or fish oil are not present.

What the samples overwhelmingly show instead is palm oil and palm kernel oil.

Dr Sagari also pointed out something important about how scientific reports work.

These reports rely heavily on probability.

They avoid absolute language unless something is statistically significant.

In this case, she said, the samples clearly contain palm oil, palm stearin, and palm kernel oil, with very, very low quantities of real ghee.

The absence of cholesterol, she concluded, means the allegation that animal fat was used is not true.

The same report is very clear about what was detected.

In all four samples, beta-sitosterol- a plant sterol was found. It is a marker for vegetable oils.

Then there is the question of real ghee.

One natural marker of milk fat is butyric acid.

The report says that the level of butyric acid was below the limit of quantification

Which means the quantity of actual ghee in these samples was very less.

And what replaced it?

According to the lab, the samples were primarily a mixture of palm oil, palm stearin, and palm kernel oil.

These are cheap, industrial, plant-based fats commonly used in food processing.

The report also flags something more troubling.

It notes that certain compounds may have been mixed in to adjust values and comply with food safety specifications.

The chargesheet mentions additives like beta-carotene, acetic acid ester, lactic acid, monoglycerides, and ghee flavour.

In plain terms, chemicals were used to adjust, colour, smell, and test values to imitate real ghee.

If you read the full chargesheet, these findings are detailed from pages 209 to 211.

So what does the chargesheet ultimately support? 

It says there was a scam

AR Dairy Food Private Limited based in Tamil Nadu was named as the primary accused in the case. 

The chargesheet states that they allegedly prepared adulterated ghee at Bhole Baba Organic Dairy plant in Uttar Pradesh, by mixing palm oils with very little ghee and chemicals to manipulate lab test values and maintain aroma.

When read in full, the chargesheet strongly supports allegations of large-scale adulteration, economic fraud, and manipulation of food quality parameters.

That’s corruption

Which was not the allegation raised by the TDP

Or Jana Sena last year

In fact both CM Chandrababu and Deputy CM Pawan Kalyan were clear in their words last year 

They alleged animal fat was used-  USING a lab report which said it was probable 

Probable. Not a sure finding 

That lab report from CALF Centre clearly gave the probability of different kind of adulterants which included animal fat.

What sensible politicians would have done is wait for the results to come 

But they didn’t want to 

Politicians have their excuses but what was the media’s?

Instead of waiting, many rushed to dramatise the situation. They chose spectacle over verification of facts.

What was their excuse? 

Of course- not everyone was careless. There were media houses that also did careful reporting 

And now- even after these findings, some politicians continue to insist otherwise.

For example, Andhra Pradesh Finance Minister Payyavula Keshav has claimed that Page 35 of the supplementary chargesheet proves animal fat adulteration.

But Page 35 is part of a section titled “Brief facts of the case”.

It simply lists allegations made in the complaint.

It does not record forensic or laboratory conclusions.

Those conclusions appear much later in the document — and they say something very different.

Even now, Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan has publicly claimed that the report “nowhere mentions” the absence of animal fat.

But the chargesheet explicitly states that cholesterol was not found, and that lard was not detected.

The science is already on record.

Journalists are supposed to slow things down, add context, and check claims.

Here, too many did the opposite.

And in doing so, they turned a serious case of food adulteration, organised corruption and fraud into something far more explosive, and far more misleading.

Because adulteration is real, and it deserves accountability.

But accusing a temple administration of deliberately using animal fat is a very different allegation. One that requires evidence, not just insinuation.

And when science finally spoke, it did not say what people were told to believe.

For suggestions and feedbacks, write to lme@thenewsminute.com

Like Pooja’s LME? Support the show: https://rzp.io/rzp/support-lme

If you are watching from abroad, click this link: https://buy.stripe.com/28o01q9md0OPdtm8wR

Become a TNM subscriber- https://www.thenewsminute.com/subscription

Produced by Megha Mukundan, Script by Pooja Prasanna, Camera by Ajay R, Graphics by Dharini Prabharan, Edit by Nikhil Sekhar ET