Bengaluru/IBNS: In a massive twist in the Dharmasthala case, the woman, who had earlier claimed her daughter had disappeared, has backtracked on her assertion, media reports said.

Sujatha Bhat said she had faked the claim that triggered massive controversy regarding allegations of mass burials, sexual assault and disappeance of women in the Dakshin Kannada district of Karnataka.

Speaking to a YouTube channel, Sujatha said she had faked the claim as per advice by some people due to a dispute with temple authorities over property.

Sujatha said she faked the claim over a plot of land, owned by her grandfather, which was allegedly taken by the Dharmasthala temple authorities without her signature.

She claimed two activists- namely Girish Mattannavar and T Jayanti- asked her to create a fake story and level the allegation.

"Nobody demanded money from me. I have never asked anyone for money either. What I questioned was how my grandfather’s property was given away without my signature. That is the only thing I asked," she told the YouTube channel as quoted by Hindustan Times.

Earlier in her complaint, Sujatha had alleged her 18-year-old daughter Ananya, who was a medical student, disappeared in 2003 during her trip to Dharmasthala.

In her complaint, she had said Ananya stayed near the temple while her friend went shopping. Upon return, her friends couldn't find Ananya.

Sujatha even went on to the extent of claiming that she was abducted, tied up, assaulted and warned not to return to Dharmasthala or speak about what had happened publicly.

The woman claimed she faced the assault when she went there to find out what had happened.

Her allegations triggered claims of "mass rapes", "mass burials", disappearance of women along with sexual assault against the Dharmasthala temple authorities.

The Karnataka government had even constituted a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe into the allegations.

Meanwhile, CN Chinnayya alias Chenna, who turned up as the 'whistleblower' in the case, has been arrested for making false allegations under oath.

Chenna was earlier referred to as the "masked man" as he preferred to conceal his identity seeking protection as a witness in the alleged case.

But the SIT deciphered that Chenna was lying and he was stripped of the witness protection.