Lesbians Out To Get Guru, Court Told (Press, 23 August 1986)

On 23 August 1986, a Sydney court heard the case of Amrit Lal Narain, a 50-year-old New Zealander known as Andy, who was fighting extradition to New Zealand on charges of assault and illegal detention. The allegations against Narain stemmed from incidents occurring between 1983 and 1985 in Greytown, New Zealand. He had been arrested in Sydney in January. The prosecution, represented by Bob Sutherland, stated that Narain was accused of assaulting a two-year-old boy, the son of informant Rosanne Sich, and illegally detaining another informant, Nell Armitt, by keeping her imprisoned in a deep pit in his garage as a supposed treatment for her epilepsy. In response, Narain's defence attorney, Maurice Neil, claimed that the informants were motivated by their personal grievances against Narain and had formed an "unhealthy lesbian relationship." Testimonies presented in court suggested that Rosanne Sich had a fixation on Narain and had expressed intentions to retaliate against him after he had asked her and Armitt to leave his property. Barbara Curry, a former member of Narain’s ashram, testified about Mrs Sich’s abusive behaviour towards her son, claiming that Sich mistreated the child through excessive discipline and had also been sexually inappropriate with him. Her husband, Bruce Curry, corroborated these allegations, stating that he had witnessed Mrs Sich engaging in both abusive and sexual behaviour towards her son as well as lesbian activities with Armitt. John Sich, who shares a past with Rosanne and now resides in Sydney, also gave evidence about their relationship and their alleged physical altercations, including instances where they were seen beating each other with plumbing pipes at the ashram. He recalled Narain’s instruction to the couple to leave due to their conduct, which eventually led to Rosanne expressing her intent to take revenge on Narain. The prosecution argued that the defence was primarily focused on discrediting the New Zealand witnesses rather than addressing the charges against Narain. Mr Sutherland indicated that Narain's defence tactics were questionable, particularly in light of Mr Sich's accusations coming after the women appeared on television to present their own claims of mistreatment at the ashram. As the hearing proceeded, Magistrate Jack Hyde was set to continue examining the case the following Monday. The situation underscored the complex dynamics of the relationships and accusations among those involved, while raising significant questions about the nature of the evidence presented by both sides.

The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact

The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand