Hindu forum defends participation of controversial guru’s representative in Westminster Diwali event

The Hindu Forum of Britain has defended the participation of the controversial Indian godman Nithyananda’s UK representative in a Diwali function at the House of Lords earlier this year.

Bob Blackman, the Conservative MP for Harrow East, and peer Rami Ranger invited Nithyananda’s representative Atmadaya to the event in October this year, according to an Observer report.

It said a brochure which had a full-page advertisement of Nithyananda’s organisation was handed out to the attendees.

Nithyananda who ran several Hindu temples and ashrams in India fled the country in 2019 and went into hiding, having faced charges of abducting children and raping a follower.

In August this year, an Indian court issued a non-bailable arrest warrant against the guru who claims to have supernatural abilities but police have said his whereabouts are not known.

Nithyananda also proclaimed to have established a “sovereign” island nation called Kailaasa.

Blackman did not comment on Atmadaya’s presence in the Diwali event but Lord Ranger said he was not aware of Nithyananda or his organisation.

“If I had known, I would never have attended an event where such unsavoury characters were being promoted,” he told the newspaper.

While Nithyananda denied charges levelled against him, Atmadaya said she said the “false” allegations against the guru were part of a campaign of religious persecution by anti-Hindu extremist elements of the government in India”.

Hindu Forum of Britain president Trupti Patel said: “We do not discriminate; each entity has its own following. Social media/internet hype and unsubstantiated allegations against UK-registered charities cannot stop any two organisations working together.”

According to Richard Rogers, Nithyananda’s UK-based lawyer, evidence suggested that the criminal allegations against Nithyananda in India were part of a broader campaign of religious persecution against his client and they were based “on falsified evidence.”

“The allegations of alleged misconduct that I have looked into, turned out to be based on evidence that is unreliable at best, and in some cases clearly manipulated or falsified,” he told the Observer.