“Ram is not a dispute, Ram is a solution.” These were the words of Prime Minister Narendra Modi during his address, delivered in Hindi, at the consecration ceremony of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya on 22 January 2024. In the same speech, he also said that the grand temple would stand as a symbol of “Bharat’s” prosperity and development.
Nearly two-and-a-half years later, the Ram Temple has returned to the spotlight, but for the wrong reasons. Allegations of theft involving devotees’ donations, or chanda, have dominated headlines across both mainstream and social media.
Following a preliminary report submitted by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) to the Uttar Pradesh government, the UP Police registered an FIR and arrested eight people in connection with the alleged misappropriation of temple donations. Top functionaries of the temple trust have weighed in on the controversy, with retired IAS officer and temple construction committee chief Nripendra Mishra saying that the alleged misappropriation in the donations has exposed serious lapses in supervision, accountability and compliance with established procedures.
And that is why the Ayodhya Ram Temple donation controversy is ThePrint Newsmaker of the Week
How the controversy started
It all began with a post on X by Samajwadi Party president Akhilesh Yadav, who alleged that crores of rupees from donations made to the Ram Temple in Ayodhya had gone missing, triggering a political row.
In his post on 7 June, Yadav claimed that “crores of rupees in offerings” to the Ram Temple were unaccounted for, urging the courts to take suo motu cognisance of the matter. He said the issue was “directly linked to the deep faith in Lord Ram held by the entire Sanatan society across the world.”
The former UP CM also questioned the government’s “silence” over the allegations, describing it as “suspicious.”
The next day, the controversy gained momentum after statements made by Mahipal Singh, who claims to have previously headed the temple’s donation counting team, went viral on social media. In a video on 11 June, Singh alleged that he had caught members of a bank team manipulating the handling of cash donations during the counting process.
Singh, who also describes himself as a former accounts in-charge of the temple, claimed that irregularities in the management of donations had been occurring for a long time. According to him, he personally detected discrepancies during his tenure and reported them to authorities, but no meaningful action was taken.
Meanwhile, Ram Temple Trust General Secretary Champat Rai defended the trust, stating that regular audits are conducted and that no irregularities have been detected so far.
Rai, in a statement on 8 June, said, ”The temple’s income, donation box collections and other financial activities are subjected to internal audits. The audit process is carried out jointly by trustees and volunteers of the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust along with officials of the State Bank of India. So far, no case of misappropriation or theft of donation funds has come to light. Amid questions raised by opposition leaders and allegations of financial irregularities, the Trust maintains that all its operations are being conducted with complete transparency.”
On the other hand, former deputy director of the Information Department in Ayodhya, Murlidhar Singh, who was responsible for media coordination during the Ram Temple inauguration ceremony, wrote a letter to PM Modi seeking a fair and independent investigation into the allegations surrounding the temple’s donation management.
According to Singh, he has been associated with the RSS since 1982, and after retiring from government service, took up legal practice. He said that reports and allegations regarding irregularities in temple donations had deeply hurt him. In his letter, Singh urged the Prime Minister to ensure a transparent and impartial probe so that the truth can be established and public confidence in the institution remains intact.
Then, Mahant Kamal Nayan Das, who is considered the successor to Ram Temple Trust chairman Mahant Nritya Gopal Das, too, called for a fair and impartial investigation into the allegations.
Das said that if there was any truth in the allegations, a thorough inquiry must be conducted and strict action should be taken against those found guilty.
“One side is making allegations against the other, while questions are also being raised over the integrity and transparency of those conducting the probe,” he said. “Anyone involved in wrongdoing should be punished.”
Also read: TV news changes its tone on Ram Mandir—reverence & respect to no-holds-barred questioning
SIT probe and irregularities
Once the controversy became big, the Yogi Adityanath government formed an SIT of three members on 15 June to probe irregularities under 2004-batch IPS officer Vijay Vishwas Pant. The SIT submitted its preliminary report to the Additional Chief Secretary (Home), Sanjay Prasad, on 23 June, recommending structural reforms within the temple trust and legal action against those found responsible.
As per UP government functionaries, the SIT has mentioned in its report the significant irregularities they found during its initial investigation and has recommended corrective measures to strengthen accountability and transparency in the management of temple donations. A recommendation to appoint a senior administrative officer as CEO has also been made to introduce greater institutional oversight over financial and operational matters within the trust.
The SIT formally began its investigation on 15 June and subsequently conducted a detailed examination of the temple’s financial and administrative systems. The team first obtained information regarding temple management and donation-handling procedures from Ram Temple Trust General Secretary Champat Rai, trust member Anil Mishra, and administrative in-charge Gopal Rao.
The team has also recorded statements from nearly 150 individuals associated with temple operations, including those involved in counting donations and handling cash collections. The probe also involved matching the statements of Ram Shankar Yadav alias Tinnu, who previously served as Champat Rai’s driver, with those of trustee Anil Mishra. Sources said discrepancies were found in their accounts, leading to three consecutive days of questioning.
The officers also examined the utilisation of money collected through donation boxes, reviewed expenditure records, and scrutinised land purchase transactions linked to the trust. Records dating back to 2021 were reportedly examined as part of the exercise. Officials from banks associated with the donation collection and counting process were also questioned.
On 25 June, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad chief, Alok Kumar, called for the registration of an FIR and a fast-track investigation into the controversy surrounding alleged misappropriation of donations received at the Ram Temple, saying that anyone found guilty must face punishment.
Asserting that “no one is above Lord Ram”, Kumar said the SIT constituted by the Uttar Pradesh government had already submitted its report, and the matter had reached the stage where a criminal case should be formally registered. After the VHP chief’s intervention, the controversy gained momentum. Later in the evening, an FIR was registered at Ayodhya’s Ram Janmabhoomi police station in connection with the alleged theft of donations, following a complaint filed by the Ram Temple Trust.
The FIR names eight individuals, including Ramashankar Yadav alias Tinnu Yadav, Anukalp Mishra, Avinash Shukla, Manish Yadav, Ramashankar Mishra, Subhash, Karunesh, and Lavkush Mishra.
The case has been registered under Section 306 (includes theft by clerk or servant, or by a person employed in a position of trust), Section 316 (criminal breach of trust), Section 317 (criminal breach of trust by public servant, banker, merchant, agent etc) and Section 61 (criminal conspiracy) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
On Friday, the Ayodhya police arrested all eight accused.
Opposition leaders have questioned the BJP’s commitment toward securing a fair probe.
“The public is saying that first, under the pretext of SIT, all evidence must have been wiped clean, and it would have been decided for sure which big fish to save and whom to trap, and only after that is the FIR being filed,” Akhilesh Yadav posted on X.
(Edited by Aamaan Alam Khan)