The arrest unfolded in the early hours, when a police team tracked the accused to a property in Taj Ganj. He had been evading authorities since 4 August, after formal complaints surfaced and a police case was filed in Delhi. His anticipatory bail plea had already been turned down by a court, which held that custodial interrogation was crucial to expose the full chain of alleged wrongdoing.
Victims’ statements, included in the FIR, recount episodes in which institute wardens reportedly introduced girls to Chaitanyananda, leading to late-night meetings in his quarters. He is accused of luring them with promises of foreign travel, sending explicit WhatsApp messages, and using physical coercion. Some students also alleged that staff at the institute pressured them to comply with his demands.
Institutional control tactics feature heavily in the allegations. Investigators say the women’s hostel was put under continuous surveillance via CCTV, and that Chaitanyananda withheld academic certificates to limit students’ mobility. Multiple fixed deposits and bank accounts linked to him, totalling sums upward of ₹8 crore, have been frozen as agencies conduct financial forensics.
The accused also faces charges beyond sexual harassment. Police have registered FIRs for cheating, forgery, criminal intimidation and conspiracy. It is alleged that he had access to nine fake diplomatic-style number plates bearing “UN” markings, and that he operated under multiple aliases across different bank accounts. Institutional bodies tied to the management institute have cut all formal links with him.
A key religious organisation linked to the institute, Dakshinamnaya Sri Sharada Peetha, disowned the accused, labelling his acts “inappropriate” and insisting that his removal from administrative roles was irrevocable.
Investigations have delved into the chronology of complaints. The first formal complaint was lodged by the institute’s administrator early in August. Following that, the Air Force’s Directorate of Education flagged concerns, given that many students came from families associated with the armed forces. Scores of students—more than 30 in some accounts—are reported to have shared narratives of harassment; 17 gave detailed testimony.
During months of evasion, Chaitanyananda is said to have frequently changed his appearance and hideouts, complicating efforts to locate him. Authorities assembled multiple search teams across several states. The arrest in Agra marks the culmination of that effort.
Post-arrest, procedural norms have begun. His custody has been secured, evidence such as hard drives and CCTV footage from the institute have been seized and sent for forensic examination, and victims’ testimonies have been recorded before the magistrate. The police emphasise that an expanded investigation is underway, with the aim of mapping the full scale of the abuse, financial irregularities and institutional complicity.
Public reaction has been intense, especially within academic and student advocacy circles. Observers have called the case emblematic of structural vulnerabilities faced by women in education institutions, particularly when power imbalances and opaque governance enable predatory behaviour. Some voices urge a broader legal review of how spiritual or religious authority is leveraged in educational settings.