Breaking News


Supreme Court Stayed Trial Court proceedings against Nithyananda in the 2010 rape case

Nithyananda Supreme Court rape case trial next date: 5 Dec. 2017

Nithyananda is a NORMAL ADULT and CAPABLE (Not impotent) - says Supreme Court Ordered Medical Tests; report exposes Nithy's fake claims of being 6-years old!

Updates from Courts


Trial court hears arguments on charge & discharge arguments for all accused. Next hearing in Trial Court on 21-08-17

Supreme Court directs Trial Court to continue with trial proceedings (arguments on charge) in Interim Order dated 7-11-2016.

Supreme Court DISMISSED ALL PETITIONS by Nithyananda and his Secretaries to Quash Charge Sheet (3rd Sep 2014)

High Court DISMISSED ALL PETITIONS by Nithyananda and his Secretaries to Quash Charge Sheet (16th Jul 2014)


17 Retaliatory/false Complaints filed so far against whistleblower Dharmananda (lenin) by Nithyananda Cult Members!!!!

14 Retaliatory/false Complaints filed so far against victim Aarthi Rao by Nithyananda & his Cult Members!!!! (All of them after charge sheet against Nithyananda)

3 cases filed in the US against Accused 1 Nithyananda (Mr. Rajasekar), Nithyananda Foundation, Life Bliss Foundation,

4 cases filed in India against Nithyananda Dhyanapeetam for fraud:

Donors of Hyderabad Ashram, Rajapalayam Ashram,Trichy ashram and Seeragapadi Ashram (near Salem) demand that fraudulently obtained donations be returned


Renowned Forensic Expert Padma Bhushan Prof. Dr. P. Chandra Sekharan states "video not morphed"

Nithyananda dismissed from Madurai Adheenam (on 19th Oct 2012), Nithyananda is banned from entering Madurai Adheenam mutt

Tuesday, April 3, 2012

Expert opinion on Nithyananda scandal video - Vijay TV Special

This is a wonderful program on Vijay TV that objectively presents the facts regarding the Nithyananda scandal video.

Nithyananda gave a press meet in Chennai on 15th March, and claimed he has forensic reports that claim the video is edited. A nationally renowned Forensic Expert, Padma Bhushan Prof. Dr. P. Chandra Sekharan states very clearly that he examined the video and found no editing or morphing in it.

Dr. Chandra Sekharan is a renowned forensic expert, who was consulted in a criminal case regarding a movie allegedly involving "Miss Jammu Kashmir". In that case, alleged porn movie had received conflicting opinions from 2 different forensic labs. To resolve the confusion, Dr. Chandra Sekharan was consulted and he confirmed that the video was doctored. Based on his video authentication as a forensic expert, she was acquitted.

Dr. Chandra Sekharan categorically denies any editing, altering or morphing of the scandal video and confirms it is authentic, contrary to Nithyananda's claims. He also further stated (in another interview) that "the videos that Nithyananda gave for testing in the US may have been edited, certainly the video tested by US experts and the CID are not the same".

[Request Tamil viewers to kindly send in a detailed translation, as a comment]

Monday, April 2, 2012

Edward Primeau’s report on Nithyananda Tape farfetched

Posted on by Dr P. Chandrasekaran

Edward J Primeau’s Report on Nithyananda tape is farfetched

The noted Indian Forensic Expert Padma Bhushan Prof Dr P Chandra Sekharan has commented that “the expert opinion of the American Audio Forensic Expert Edward J Primeau on Nithyananda tape is farfetched” in as much as he could not have had access to the original tape. The original video in tape was made by Nithyananda’s driver Lenin Karuppan aka Dharmananda. This tape only can technically be called original or genuine. All the other copies made out in compact discs (CD) are only duplicates and many multi generated CDs were prepared from the first generation CD. “The electronic gadgets the experts use to examine these CDs will certainly show signs of editing and other inherent defects of reproduction” says Prof Sekharan.

Edward was right in saying that the video he had examined (obviously in CDs) are not genuine and authentic. But he has exceeded his limit and passed judgement by saying that ‘the video to be excluded from any factual relevance to the events that appear to be happening’. Wherefrom then the events appear? From wilderness! An expert cannot make inferences. In fact according to Edward’s very own words, I quote “Many times the video evidence being submitted in litigation is good as a standalone exhibit and a video forensic expert is not needed. It is mostly the defense that is guilty of wasting money and complicating a case”. It is indeed very sure that the ‘American Expert as well as our CFSL have examined two different evidence materials and not the same one in this case’ asserts Prof Sekharan