GBC and Governance

“This is ISKCON versus Madhu Pandit Dasa”: ISKCON India spokesman shows Bengaluru leader’s old court filings on national TV

On national Hindi television, ISKCON India’s communications director says the Bengaluru temple case is not a dispute between two ISKCON societies but “ISKCON versus Madhu Pandit Dasa”, and holds up court filings in which, he says, Madhu Pandit Dasa himself described the Bangalore temple as a branch of ISKCON Bombay.

Image: Akincana Gocara (AI-generated composite), from a KAICIID portrait of Yudhistir Govinda Dasa and a News Nation / YouTube video

NEW DELHI, India — Yudhistir Govinda Dasa, communications director of ISKCON India, used an interview on the Hindi news channel News Nation, published on 18 October 2026, to argue that ISKCON Bangalore’s president, Madhu Pandit Dasa, had for years told courts in Bengaluru that his temple was run from Bombay. [1][3] ISKCON Bangalore, which won the temple in the Supreme Court in May 2025, says it is an independent society registered in Bangalore; its website had not responded to the interview when this report was prepared. [4][2]

Watch the interview

The segment, about four minutes long and in Hindi, had been viewed about 9,000 times by the evening of 18 October. [1]

How News Nation framed it

The anchor introduced the segment as a “new twist” in the Bengaluru temple ownership case ahead of the Supreme Court’s hearing of ISKCON Mumbai’s review petition. According to the introduction, ISKCON’s India communications head had made a “big disclosure”, raising questions about old documents and about the affidavit of the temple’s former auditor, and asking why the auditor made a U-turn on his affidavit after nine months. [1]

That last question refers to V.L. Varadarajan, ISKCON Bangalore’s former auditor, who in January 2026 filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court alleging that years of the Bangalore society’s accounts had been backdated, and who on 6 October 2026 asked the court to let him withdraw it, saying he had signed it without reading it. [5] The published segment, however, ends before the auditor is discussed: the interview covers only the history of the Bangalore temple and Madhu Pandit Dasa’s earlier court statements. [1]

“Not ISKCON Mumbai versus ISKCON Bengaluru”

Asked what had happened since the review petition was listed, Yudhistir Govinda Dasa rejected the way the case is usually described.

Through this episode I would like to tell people that there is no matter called ISKCON Mumbai versus ISKCON Bengaluru. The actual matter is only ISKCON versus Madhu Pandit Dasa, his brother-in-law, both their wives and some of their associates, who have tried to grab ISKCON’s property through fraud, fabrication and forgery.

Yudhistir Govinda Dasa, communications director, ISKCON India, to News Nation, 18 October 2026 (translated from Hindi) [1]

These are the allegations of ISKCON Mumbai, the society registered in 1971. They are the subject of a criminal case registered in Kolkata in April 2026 against Madhu Pandit Dasa and twelve others, in which no court has made any finding. [5][6]

ISKCON Mumbai’s account of the history

Yudhistir Govinda Dasa told the channel that Srila Prabhupada registered ISKCON in Bombay in 1971 under the Bombay Public Trust Act and the Societies Registration Act, and that the temples he opened in India before 1977, in Vrindavan, Delhi, Hyderabad, Bhubaneswar, Kolkata and Mayapur, had no independent status but were branches under Bombay’s legal and administrative control. Srila Prabhupada’s wish, he said, was that ISKCON would function in India as a single society reporting to Bombay. [1]

In 1984 we ourselves sent one of our devotees to Bangalore. His name was Madhu Pandit Dasa, and we told him to expand the programme there.

Yudhistir Govinda Dasa to News Nation (translated from Hindi) [1]

From 1984 until 2001, when the case was filed, Madhu Pandit Dasa worked as ISKCON Bombay’s representative, he said: the Bangalore temple used the Bombay society’s tax registration and, like the other branches, sent its accounts to Bombay every year. [1]

The court filings shown on air

Yudhistir Govinda Dasa then showed on screen a series of documents which, he said, were Madhu Pandit Dasa’s own statements in earlier lawsuits in Bengaluru:

  • 1986, a case before a city civil judge in Bengaluru, in which the filing states, in the English he read out, that the temple in Bangalore “is having its administrative office in Bombay and it functions under the administrative control of Bombay office”; [1]
  • 1994, a complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum in Bengaluru, in which, he said, Madhu Pandit Dasa stated that ISKCON is registered in Bombay and that he was “administratively under that”; [1]
  • March 1999 and 2000, further filings before the city civil court in Bengaluru, which he said again described the temple as a branch of the Bombay society and carried Madhu Pandit Dasa’s signature. [1]

“He made this statement again and again,” Yudhistir Govinda Dasa said. The segment as published breaks off at that point. [1]

These earlier statements are the “judicial admissions” at the centre of ISKCON Mumbai’s review petition. At an earlier hearing its counsel argued that several such admissions had not been considered in the May 2025 judgment, and the bench said it would hear the matter “both on merit and scope of review”. [2][5]

ISKCON Bangalore’s position

ISKCON Bangalore says it is “an independent ISKCON society registered in Bangalore”, that the Bangalore Development Authority allotted the temple land to it in 1988, and that the property and the funds to build the temple were raised in Bangalore. After the Supreme Court’s judgment of 16 May 2025 it said the Hare Krishna Hill temple “belongs to ISKCON Bangalore society, not ISKCON Mumbai society”, and that ISKCON Mumbai had been restrained from interfering with its management. [4]

In that judgment, Justices Abhay S. Oka and A.G. Masih held that ISKCON Bangalore is a distinct society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, not a branch of ISKCON Mumbai. [2][5] The 16 May 2025 statement does not address Madhu Pandit Dasa’s earlier court filings, and as of 18 October 2026, 20:30 Brasília time, ISKCON Bangalore’s website carried no statement on the News Nation interview, the auditor’s affidavits or the Kolkata case. [4]

Where things stand

The Supreme Court has not yet heard the review petition on its merits. Justice Manoj Misra recused himself from the bench on 5 October, and the papers went back to the Chief Justice of India to form a new bench. Until the review is decided, the May 2025 judgment stands and the temple remains with ISKCON Bangalore. [2][5]

A note on the source

The News Nation segment presents one party’s case: it interviews ISKCON India’s communications director and carries no response from ISKCON Bangalore or Madhu Pandit Dasa. Akincana Gocara has not examined the documents shown on air; their descriptions above are Yudhistir Govinda Dasa’s. The quotations are our translation from the Hindi, made from the video’s automatic transcript.

Read Also:


Sources

  1. News Nation, “ISKCON Bengaluru Case: इस्कॉन मंदिर स्वामित्व मामले में नया मोड़ | पुनर्विचार याचिका पर नया विवाद”, News Nation (YouTube), 18 October 2026. youtube.com/watch?v=8jmyUk0_TzQ
  2. Ritwik Choudhury, “Supreme Court Justice Manoj Misra recuses from hearing case between ISKCON Mumbai and ISKCON Bengaluru”, Bar and Bench, 9 October 2026. barandbench.com/news/litigation/supreme-court-justice-manoj-misra-…
  3. “India Court’s Decision to Review the Bengaluru Case Marks a ‘Significant Milestone’”, ISKCON News, 1 October 2026. iskconnews.org/india-courts-decision-to-review-the-bengaluru-case-…
  4. ISKCON Bangalore, “Supreme Court’s Judgement: ISKCON Bangalore – ISKCON Mumbai dispute”, iskconbangalore.org, 16 May 2025. iskconbangalore.org/supreme-courts-judgement-iskcon-bangalore-… (archived copy)
  5. “Who Owns Bengaluru’s Hare Krishna Temple? Supreme Court Review Delayed Again as Judge Steps Aside and Former Auditor Retracts Affidavit”, Akincana Gocara, 12 October 2026. akincana.net/2026/10/12/who-owns-bengalurus-hare-krishna-temple-…
  6. “Former auditor of ritvik temple says he was given ₹72 lakh in jewellery before signing affidavit against Madhu Pandit Dasa, New Delhi Post reports”, Akincana Gocara, 15 October 2026. akincana.net/2026/10/15/former-auditor-of-ritvik-temple-says-he-…
Share:

Follow us

sankirta

Recent Posts

Madhvacharya on Sadhaka-Gurus: ISKCON Scholars Publish a Compilation Approved by Three Madhva Scholars

Two ISKCON scholars have gathered what Śrī Madhvācārya taught about gurus who are not yet…

3 hours ago

A Single Verse Does Not Settle Female Diksa Gurus, Rohini-tanaya Dasa Argues in New IISB Paper

A week after his exchange with Damodara Dasa under an Akincana Gocara post, Rohini-tanaya Dasa…

3 hours ago

Bhakti Vikasa Swami Announces He Will Reduce His Traveling and Establish a Base in Mayapur

The ISKCON guru, nearly 70, says his energy never came back after an illness this…

2 days ago

GBC Wants Kirtan Leaders in Dhoti and Kurta, Sari or Gopi Dress: Kirtan Ministry Publishes Temple Kirtan Guidelines

The poster the GBC shared on 5 November names the clothes it prefers for whoever…

2 days ago

Are We Ready for Varnasrama? Open Letter Tells the GBC to Start Training Kshatriyas During Its Pause on Initiations

Image: Akincana Gocara (AI-generated), from a photo of Srila Prabhupada published by Nandgram Dham GLOBAL…

4 days ago

Madhu Pandit Dasa Accused of Offering ₹50 Crore to the Auditor Who Turned on Him, With the Phones Kept Away

An updated briefing note from the Mumbai side of the ISKCON Bengaluru dispute sets out…

4 days ago