Supreme Court Denies Urgent Hearing On Ram Mandir Donation Theft Case, Asks: 'What's The Urgency?'

The Supreme Court has declined to urgently list a plea seeking a CBI-led investigation into allegations of theft and embezzlement of donations at the Ram Janmabhoomi Temple in Ayodhya. The matter is now expected to be taken up after the court reopens following the summer vacation on July 13.

The petition seeks a court-monitored, time-bound probe by a multi-disciplinary Special Investigation Team led by the Central Bureau of Investigation. It also asks for immediate preservation of CCTV footage, digital payment records, donation logs and other material linked to offerings made at the temple.

A vacation bench of Justices M M Sundresh and Sheel Nagu considered the mentioning request on Monday. When advocates Ajay Kumar Rai and Dinesh Kumar Yadav sought urgent listing, the bench asked, “What is the urgency?” The court did not grant immediate hearing and indicated that the matter could be placed after reopening.

What the Ram Temple donation plea seeks

The petitioners have argued that the allegations require investigation by an agency with adequate technical and financial expertise. Their plea asks the Supreme Court to supervise the constitution of a CBI-led SIT and ensure that the investigation is not delayed or compromised.

The petition also seeks directions to preserve and produce CCTV footage, DVR recordings, digital payment logs, transaction records and other documents connected with temple donations and offerings. The petitioners want these records secured until the proposed CBI-led team takes over the probe.

The plea states that even if reports about missing funds and irregularities are ultimately found to be untrue, they have already caused concern among devotees. It says the issue has wider public importance because the temple is associated with the faith of millions across India.

“Whether or not the reports regarding missing funds and other alleged irregularities concerning the Shri Ram Janmbhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust are ultimately found to be true, such reports have caused deep concern and pain among the generations that struggled for the restoration of the glory of Ayodhya,” the petition states.

The petitioners have also said the matter cannot be treated as a routine financial dispute. “Generations have fought to restore the glory of Ayodhya. It is not a simple matter; it has pan-India ramifications affecting the sentiments of millions of devotees,” they said in the plea.

Police case and arrests in Ayodhya

The legal move comes after the Ayodhya police registered an FIR against eight named individuals and other unidentified persons. The case includes allegations of theft, misappropriation and embezzlement of money and valuables donated to Lord Ram at the temple.

All eight named accused have been arrested and remanded to judicial custody. The FIR was lodged on a complaint filed by Krishna Mohan, a member of the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust, which manages the temple and its related affairs.

The police action followed preliminary findings submitted by a Special Investigation Team to the Uttar Pradesh government. According to the available details, several of the accused were associated with the process of counting donations. One accused is stated to be the driver of Champat Rai, the general secretary of the Trust.

The alleged irregularities were noticed after temple officials found a mismatch between cash collected from donation boxes and the amount deposited in the bank. That discrepancy reportedly prompted an internal check of the donation counting process and surveillance arrangements.

Officials then installed hidden cameras inside the room where donations were counted, in addition to the existing CCTV system. Police sources have said recordings over nearly a week allegedly showed attempts to block visible cameras while currency notes were removed from prepared cash bundles.

Why preservation of records matters

The demand to preserve footage and transaction records is significant because donation-related cases often depend on documentary and electronic evidence. CCTV recordings, digital logs and bank deposit records can help investigators establish whether discrepancies were clerical, procedural or criminal in nature.

For a temple that receives donations from across the country, the chain of custody is also important. Investigators would need to examine how cash is collected, counted, sealed, recorded and deposited. Any break in that process can become central to a criminal inquiry.

The petition’s request for a multi-disciplinary SIT appears aimed at covering different aspects of the case. Such a team could include officers with experience in financial investigation, digital forensics, surveillance review and criminal evidence handling, if the court eventually agrees to such a direction.

At this stage, however, the Supreme Court has not ordered a CBI investigation or made any finding on the allegations. Its latest order only concerns urgent listing during vacation. The existing police investigation and judicial proceedings against the arrested accused will continue in accordance with law.