Back
Ram Temple Donation Theft Case UP SIT Tells Within Two Days
The has informed the that it will file the in the alleged Ram Temple donation theft case within two days, preempting the expiry of the statutory 90-day period that would entitle the accused to . Solicitor General made the submission before a bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana on Monday, while also revealing that the SIT had identified 105 instances of theft through CCTV footage analysis.
The development comes as a batch of petitions seeking an independent, into the alleged embezzlement of donations at the Ayodhya Ram Temple remains pending before the apex court. The bench perused a detailed status report submitted by the SIT in a , taking note of the progress made since the probe was initiated.
Deadline
Solicitor General Mehta emphasized the urgency of filing the , pointing out that the 90-day period from the date of the first arrest would expire on . Under —now replaced by —an accused becomes entitled to statutory or if the investigating agency fails to file the within the prescribed period.
“Ninety days from the date of the first arrest are going to be over on , so we will have to file the , otherwise, they (the accused) will get ,” Mehta told the bench. He added, “Within two days we will be filing.”
The assurance came after the court had earlier directed the Uttar Pradesh government to expedite the investigation and place a status report before it. The SIT, headed by Lucknow Divisional Commissioner Vijay Vishwas Pant, was constituted on following a preliminary inquiry that revealed irregularities in the counting and custody of donations.
SIT Investigation
According to the status report, the SIT has gathered substantial documentary and electronic evidence against eight persons who have been arrested in connection with the case. The accused—Avinash Shukla, Anukalp Mishra, Lav Kush Mishra, Manish Kumar Yadav, Karunesh Pandey, Ram Shankar Mishra, Subhash Srivastava and Ramashankar alias Tinnu Yadav—were associated with the temple’s donation-counting process. They were arrested after an FIR was lodged on .
The court noted that the SIT had analyzed CCTV footage and other material to identify all individuals involved. The report stated that receipts for valuable articles are generated through software and that the articles are kept in lockers, suggesting a systematic process that was allegedly breached. The bench recorded that “the investigation is substantially completed and a would be filed in the competent court on the conclusion of the probe.”
The matter has also drawn attention to the larger question of transparency in the management of temple finances. Petitioners, including RJD MP Sudhakar Singh, lawyer , and the , have sought a comprehensive audit of the ’s finances and a probe by the . The had earlier issued notices to the Union, the Uttar Pradesh government, and the Trust, and allowed public-spirited citizens to submit suggestions to the Solicitor General’s office.
Provision
is a critical safeguard in criminal procedure, designed to prevent indefinite detention during investigation. Under the CrPC and BNSS, for offenses punishable with imprisonment of up to ten years, the maximum period for investigation without filing a is 60 days; for offenses carrying higher punishments, it is 90 days. Once this period expires, the accused acquires an to be released on bail, irrespective of the merits of the case.
The has repeatedly held that this right is not merely procedural but substantive, and that courts must ensure its timely enforcement. In the present case, the SIT’s rush to file the before reflects the binding nature of this deadline. If the is filed within the stipulated period, the accused will continue to remain in custody pending trial, subject to applications.
The bench, while perusing the SIT’s status report, did not interfere with the investigation at this stage. Chief Justice Surya Kant observed that the did not want to take the matter away from the Sessions Judge, but added that further orders would be passed if any additional investigation was required.
Broader Implications
The Ram Temple donation theft case has significant implications for the administration of religious institutions and public trusts. The allegations, though yet to be tested in court, have raised concerns about the accountability mechanisms governing the collection and handling of donations. The petitioners have argued that the sheer volume of offerings at the Ram Temple—which attracts millions of devotees annually—necessitates an independent audit to ensure that funds are properly accounted for and not misappropriated.
The ’s willingness to monitor the investigation and its direction to the SIT to include a signals a judicial sensitivity to these concerns. The court had earlier observed that “remedial actions will have to be taken” and steps will be taken to “ensure transparency.” This could set a precedent for how courts handle similar allegations against other religious or charitable trusts.
For legal professionals, the case serves as a practical illustration of the provision and the interplay between investigative timelines and constitutional rights. It also highlights the court’s role in balancing the need for a thorough probe against the risk of prolonged detention.
Conclusion
With the expected to be filed imminently, the immediate focus will shift to the trial court in Ayodhya, where the accused will face formal charges. The has kept the petitions seeking an independent investigation and audit pending, indicating that it may revisit the matter if the reveals gaps or if the petitioners raise further concerns. For now, the SIT has met the statutory deadline, preserving the state’s right to continue custody of the accused while the case proceeds.
The next hearing in the will likely assess whether the investigation has been conducted in a fair and transparent manner, and whether any further oversight is required. As the case unfolds, it will continue to be closely watched by the legal community, religious institutions, and the public at large.
