Photographs showing Adoor Prakash with Potti and separate images of Potti with Sonia Gandhi began circulating on social media, quickly becoming ammunition in a political battle.
Published Jan 01, 2026 | 10:46 PM ⚊ Updated Jan 01, 2026 | 10:46 PM
Gold-plated sanctum sanctorum of Sabarimala.
Synopsis: The Opposition Leader went a step further, alleging that the Chief Minister’s Office was exerting pressure on the SIT to protect influential CPI(M) leaders. He recalled that during the elections, the opposition had accused the government of delaying the questioning and arrest of key CPI(M) figures and claimed that the court later vindicated their stand.
The probe into the sensational Sabarimala gold theft has taken a sharp political turn, with the Special Investigation Team (SIT) indicating that it intends to question UDF convener and Congress MP Adoor Prakash over his alleged links with prime accused Unnikrishnan Potti.
The development has triggered a fresh round of accusations and counter-accusations between the ruling LDF and the opposition UDF, dragging the Chief Minister’s Office (CMO) into the controversy.
Sources close to the investigation said the SIT has prepared a list of individuals who had close interactions with Potti and that Adoor Prakash figures in it.
Investigators are particularly examining Potti’s visits to Delhi, including meetings with Congress Parliamentary Party chairperson Sonia Gandhi.
According to the SIT, Potti visited Sonia Gandhi’s residence twice.
On one occasion, Adoor Prakash reportedly accompanied him, while on another visit, Congress MP Anto Antony was present. Investigators are seeking to ascertain how Potti, who later emerged as the key accused in the gold theft case, managed to secure meetings with top Congress leadership in quick succession and whether any political influence was involved.
The SIT’s move to widen the probe followed statements recorded from former Devaswom Minister Kadakampally Surendran and former Travancore Devaswom Board president P.S. Prashant, after which investigators felt the need to verify the political connections of the accused.
Adoor Prakash, however, has categorically denied receiving any summons from the SIT.
Reacting sharply to media queries, the MP said he came to know about the alleged questioning only through news reports.
“No one has called me. I have not received any notice. Maybe the media has received the summons, not me,” a visibly irritated Prakash told reporters before driving away.
Escalating his attack, the UDF convener alleged that the Chief Minister’s Political Secretary, P. Sasi, was behind the “fabricated” reports.
“This seems to be a new job created by the political secretary in the Chief Minister’s Office,” he alleged, asserting that he has nothing to hide and no fear.
Prakash said he was ready to appear before the SIT whenever officially asked.
“If they call me, I will go. I will even inform the media before appearing. If the SIT does not allow the media inside, I will still make public what I am going to say,” he said.
Clarifying his association with Potti, Prakash said he had not introduced anyone to Sonia Gandhi or fixed any appointment.
“Anyone can verify that. Potti is a voter in my constituency. I did not meet him knowing that he was a robber. I went to Sabarimala when I was invited for annadanam. That is all,” he said, adding that he would reveal all details before the SIT.
Photographs showing Adoor Prakash with Potti and separate images of Potti with Sonia Gandhi began circulating on social media, quickly becoming ammunition in a political battle.
The ruling CPI(M) projected them as a counter to earlier opposition allegations linking Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan to the accused.
The case has already led to the arrest of ten people, including three senior CPI(M) leaders, further sharpening the political stakes.
Former Devaswom Minister Kadakampally Surendran also entered the debate, warning against what he termed the spread of falsehoods in the gold theft controversy.
In a Facebook post, he said attempts were being made to mislead the public.
“Unnikrishnan Potti has not given a single house to anyone in my constituency with my help. If someone claims otherwise, let them prove it,” Kadakampally wrote, mocking Opposition Leader VD Satheesan for allegedly making allegations without producing evidence. He also took a dig at Prakash’s remarks, questioning his understanding of court procedures.
The Opposition Leader went a step further, alleging that the Chief Minister’s Office was exerting pressure on the SIT to protect influential CPI(M) leaders. He recalled that during the elections, the opposition had accused the government of delaying the questioning and arrest of key CPI(M) figures and claimed that the court later vindicated their stand.
Why, he asked, was Kadakampally Surendran questioned “in secrecy” while news about the possible questioning of Adoor Prakash was leaked?
“All those involved are accountable to the law. Was Adoor Prakash a minister when the looting took place in Sabarimala?” he asked, alleging an attempt to create a false political balance.
The Opposition Leader further alleged that CPM-biased officers were inducted into the SIT under pressure from the CMO to monitor and influence the probe.
“The pressure of the Chief Minister’s Office is above the SIT,” he claimed, accusing the government of shielding those arrested for “stealing Ayyappan’s gold”.
The Chief Minister’s Office firmly rejected Adoor Prakash’s allegations, calling them “completely baseless”. In an official release, the CMO clarified that the SIT was constituted by the High Court and that its investigation is being conducted under the supervision of a Division Bench.
“The SIT submits its report directly to the High Court. There is a strict court order that information related to the investigation should not be leaked.
The Chief Minister’s Office or the Political Secretary has no role in this,” the release said, dismissing the MP’s claims as propaganda contrary to facts.
Meanwhile, the SIT probing the Sabarimala gold theft case has indicated that the theft may be far more extensive than initially believed. What began as an inquiry into missing gold from the Dwarapalaka idols later revealed gold theft from the sanctum sanctorum’s door frames and several other gold-clad structures.
In a custody application filed before the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge (Vigilance) in Kollam, SIT head S Sasidharan stated that multiple temple components, including the gold-cladded Shiva idol on top, arches with Vyali figures, raashi and Dasharadha plates, and portions of the sanctum door frame were handed over to the prime accused Unnikrishnan Potty.
These items were falsely documented as copper to facilitate gold cladding. Records show that in July 2019, gold-cladded Dwarapalaka idols and their pedestals weighing 42.8 kg were entrusted to Potty.
However, when the items were later produced at a Chennai-based firm, their weight had reduced by over 4 kg. Even after gold plating, the final weight showed an unexplained shortfall of more than 4.1 kg compared to the original.
The SIT has confirmed that gold was chemically extracted from several gold-cladded copper panels at Smart Creations in Chennai, owned by 9th accused Pankaj Bhandari.
During questioning, Bhandari admitted that gold was separated from multiple temple panels, including those bearing avatars, zodiac signs, prabha mandalam, Dwarapalakas and pillar plates. He later produced 109.243 grams of gold, claiming it as labour charges.
Tenth accused Roddam Pandurangaiah Naga Govardhan, owner of a jewellery firm in Karnataka, submitted 474.96 grams of gold to the SIT, stating it was received as equivalent gold routed through an intermediary.
Investigators, however, believe the recovered gold represents only a fraction of what was siphoned off. Samples from the temples gold-cladded panels have now been sent to the VSSC Thiruvananthapuram, for scientific analysis to determine the actual quantity of gold originally used.
(With inputs from Dileep V Kumar and Sreelakshmi Soman)
