Breaking: Supreme Court Disposes Of Pleas Seeking CBI Probe Into Ram Mandir Donation Row After State Files Chargesheet; Petitioners Allowed To Assist Magistrate
SG Tushar Mehta told the Court that donations were pocketed by employees during the counting process, and that the SIT traced the money through deposits in the accused'S bank accounts and through properties.
The Supreme Court disposed of a batch of petitions seeking a court-monitored, CBI-led probe into the alleged embezzlement of donations received at the Ayodhya Ram Mandir, after the State of Uttar Pradesh informed it that a chargesheet had been filed in the matter.
The Court directed the Judicial Magistrate concerned to proceed in accordance with law, while granting the petitioners liberty to assist the trial court, given the element of public interest involved.
The Court clarified that it had expressed no opinion on the merits of the allegations.
The Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana ordered, "The State of UP has filed this status report, according to which the chargesheet has now been filed in the matter. In view of the matter, keeping this in view, disposal of this petition and other connected matters with a direction to the learned Judicial Magistrate to proceed in the matter in accordance with law. Since there is an element of public interest involved, liberty is granted to the petitioner to assist the Court of the Learned Judicial Magistrate on the same premise as the law enables a victim of the crime to assist the court. So, in this regard, we have not—it is however clarified, in order to ensure that no prejudice is caused to anyone, that this court has not expressed any opinion with respect to the merits or allegations in the matter."
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for the State
Mehta submitted, "The chargesheet is filed. Yes. And what we have done is broadly, it is that the theft was occurring at the time of counting. The individuals who were counting have taken the money. What we have done is the CCTV footage is available only for 45 days, otherwise it has auto-erasing technology. But we went backwards. What they used to do was they would take the money and invest somewhere or deposit in the bank account. So, we checked the bank account of each of the employees who are accused and we went back-dated to see how much amount was deposited. So, we have that figure. Some of them have invested in property. For example, the sale deed is shown that it is purchased worth 15 lakhs as per the sale deed, but the property is worth 50 lakhs. So, the balance obviously is paid by cash and cash must be generated through this because he has no other source of income. So, that is how we have identified."
Narendra Kumar Goswami, one of the three petitioners, moved the Apex Court seeking a CBI probe into the matter. He also sought a Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) audit of the finances of the Sri Ram Janmabhoomi Theerth Kshetra Trust, which manages the affairs of the Ram temple.
Ajay Kumar Rai and Dinesh Kumar Yadav filed the second petition seeking similar measures. Besides seeking a Supreme Court-monitored CBI probe, the third petition filed by RJD MP Sudhakar Singh has sought a forensic audit of the entire finances of the temple trust.
The Court said, "We will now direct the court to proceed in the matter, and in case, we will grant you people also liberty that wherever necessary, you continue to assist the court because this is not a simple simpleton case of an accused versus the State. It's a case where some element of public interest is also involved. Therefore, we will grant you—just as the law now permits the victims of the crime to assist the court, in a similar manner, you will also be entitled to assist. That right we will confirm to you."
On June 29, 2026, the Court had directed the listing of the plea. The plea sought stringent interim directions to preserve all digital logs, physical registers, bank statements, and CCTV footage from the temple complex to avoid any tampering with critical evidence.
The Allahabad High Court had refused to accord an out-of-turn hearing on a plea seeking an inquiry into the alleged irregularities in the management of offerings at the Ram Temple in Ayodhya, observing there was no urgency in the matter.
On June 13, the Uttar Pradesh government had constituted an SIT following a request from the temple trust following allegations of misappropriation of donations received at the Ayodhya Ram temple. The SIT comprises Lucknow Divisional Commissioner Vijay Vishwas Pant, Inspector General of Police Kiran S and Finance Department Special Secretary Neel Ratan.
On July 13, 2026, while issuing notice in the plea, the Court had directed the Special Investigation Team formed by the Uttar Pradesh government to submit a status report in the matter.
It also asked the litigants not to politicise the issue. It also had asked the Uttar Pradesh government, to take instructions on whether the Special Investigation Team (SIT) could be entrusted with the responsibility to probe the case instead of the local police.
The Court had also directed the Special Investigation Team (SIT) to include a forensic investigative auditor to probe the alleged embezzlement and siphoning of donation money at the Kshetra Trust.
On September 21, 2026, the Court was told that the Special Investigation Team would file its first chargesheet on or before September 25.
Cause Title: Ajay Kumar Rai Vs. Ram Janmbhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust [WP (Crl.) No. 241/26 @ Diary No. 37770/26]