Mathura. Amidst recent controversies surrounding the renowned saint Premanand Maharaj, spiritual orator Aniruddhacharya has come forward in his support. Addressing the ongoing discussions regarding the death of one of Premanand Maharaj’s disciples and the subsequent disappearance of a teenager, Aniruddhacharya questioned the conduct of certain sections of the media and social media. During a spiritual discourse, he remarked that it is inappropriate to pass judgment on an individual without fully grasping the facts, merely in the race to garner TRPs and views.
This statement by Aniruddhacharya is rapidly going viral on social media. In the viral video, he is seen expressing his respect for Premanand Maharaj, noting that the saint has guided millions onto the path of devotion and that his contributions cannot be overlooked.
Aniruddhacharya observed that in today’s era, information spreads extremely fast on social media. Often, people form opinions before the full details of an incident come to light. He alleged that certain individuals and media platforms begin discussing matters based on incomplete information solely to boost TRPs and viewership.
Expressing his displeasure during the discourse, Aniruddhacharya stated that it is wrong to declare someone guilty before an investigation is conducted and all facts are revealed. He noted that people frequently pass judgment without even understanding the full context of an issue, effectively assuming the role of a judge.
Highlighting Premanand Maharaj’s religious and spiritual contributions, he mentioned that the saint has connected a vast number of people to the path of devotion. His discourses are heard by people across the country and the world, and large numbers of devotees visit his ashram in Vrindavan. He emphasized the importance of understanding the facts before drawing conclusions about such a person based on a single incident.
Notably, there has been considerable discussion recently regarding Premanand Maharaj and his ashram in Vrindavan. Following an incident involving the death of one of his disciples, various questions were raised on social media. Subsequently, the case of Anuj Chaudhary—a 16-year-old boy from Sadabad, Hathras—going missing also drew public attention.
Anuj’s family staged a sit-in protest outside Premanand Maharaj’s ashram in Vrindavan, demanding that the teenager be located as soon as possible. The protest was called off after the police assured the family that a search would be conducted. Later, the police successfully recovered the teenager from an ashram in Barsana.
Since the teenager’s recovery, the police have been questioning him to gather details about the entire sequence of events. Given this, it would be premature to draw conclusions regarding the role of any institution or individual before the investigation concludes. The police investigation into the circumstances surrounding the boy’s disappearance and his arrival in Barsana is considered crucial.
It is against this backdrop that Aniruddhacharya has issued a statement. He expressed objection to the practice of trading accusations before the facts of an incident come to light. He noted that in the age of social media, sensational content spreads rapidly, yet it is equally important to verify its authenticity.
Aniruddhacharya also questioned the role of the media. He stated that while the media has a responsibility to present accurate information to the public, the race for TRPs should not lead to narratives that damage an individual’s reputation. He also appealed to the public not to make hasty judgments based on a single video, post, or claim.
Regarding Premanand Maharaj, he remarked that the Maharaj is known as a spiritual saint who has long dedicated himself to connecting people with devotion to Radha and Krishna. His discourses and spiritual messages are widely viewed and heard on social media. According to Aniruddhacharya, one should consider a saint’s entire life and body of work before forming an opinion about them. Aniruddhacharya’s statement has elicited mixed reactions on social media. While his supporters view his remarks as a strong defense of Premanand Maharaj, the facts surrounding the controversy and the ongoing police investigation remain central to the discussion.
A crucial aspect of this entire episode is that no allegations against Premanand Maharaj or his ashram can be treated as established facts prior to the conclusion of the investigation. The actual circumstances will only become clear following police questioning regarding the teenager’s case and investigations into other related matters.
For now, Aniruddhacharya’s statement has certainly given a new turn to the controversy. A video of him expressing his displeasure—from the stage of a religious discourse—with the conduct of the media and social media is circulating widely. While expressing respect for Premanand Maharaj, he conveyed a clear message: rather than putting someone in the dock based merely on speculation and incomplete information, one should wait for the full facts to emerge.
