New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday, July 20, cautioned against politicising the alleged theft of donations meant for the Ram temple in Ayodhya, as it heard a batch of petitions seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) investigation and an independent audit of the temple trust’s finances.
“It is a simple case of commission of offence… we are cautioning — do not politicise this issue,” Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant said, heading a bench that also included Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana.
Indicating that it would pass some directions in the matter, the bench put off further hearing to go through a status report filed by the Uttar Pradesh government on the investigation so far.
Eight arrested, probe underway: Centre
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, the Centre’s top law officer, told the court that the state police was investigating the allegations and that eight people had been arrested so far. “State police is investigating… it has found that (a) cognisable offence was made out. I can’t divulge much as it is an ongoing investigation,” he said.
The CJI said the bench would examine the status report placed before it and asked the Solicitor General to take instructions on reconstituting the Special Investigation Team (SIT) that the Uttar Pradesh government had earlier set up to probe the matter.
He stressed that the investigation must be fair, transparent and carried to its logical conclusion.
Court declines website disclosure
Senior advocate Devadatt Kamat, appearing for some of the petitioners, raised concerns about gold and silver articles allegedly going missing and donations not being properly accounted for. He suggested that receipts issued to devotees during the temple’s construction be put up on a website so donors could verify whether their contributions had reached the trust.
The CJI did not agree to disclosure on a website, noting that there could be false claims of donations having been made, which would make such a step impractical. He said instead that proper records must be maintained wherever a receipt had been issued.
On a separate submission that digital evidence such as closed circuit television (CCTV) footage be preserved, the Solicitor General assured the court that this was already being done. The bench did not pass any order on a plea to upload the police first information report (FIR) and status report online for the petitioners’ benefit, and also questioned why multiple parties needed to separately approach the court over the same issue.
Petitions before the Supreme Court
The case arises from at least four separate pleas. The first was filed by Narendra Kumar Goswami, seeking a CBI probe as well as an audit by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of the Shri Ram Janmbhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust, which manages the temple.
A second plea, by Ajay Kumar Rai and Dinesh Kumar Yadav, seeks similar directions for a CBI investigation and measures by the Centre, the Uttar Pradesh government and the trust to safeguard donors’ interests, arguing that the allegations have caused widespread concern among those who supported the Ram temple movement, regardless of whether they are eventually proven.
A third petition, filed by Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) MP Sudhakar Singh, seeks a Supreme Court-monitored forensic audit of the trust’s entire finances alongside a CBI probe, and asks that all financial records, including physical documents, digital ledgers, UPI transaction logs and bank statements, be preserved to prevent tampering.
The fourth petition, by the Hindu Dharma Parishad, seeks a top court-monitored probe into the donation allegations.
Separately, the Allahabad High Court has declined to entertain similar pleas seeking a high-level probe, to avoid parallel proceedings running alongside the Supreme Court case.
An FIR has already been registered by the Uttar Pradesh Police following a preliminary inquiry by the state-appointed SIT.
The Nirmohi Akhara has also separately approached the Supreme Court seeking that the trust be restructured as a public trust, arguing that its present structure lacks adequate accountability and does not reflect the spirit of the top court’s 2019 Ayodhya verdict.
| 
