Ram temple donation case: SIT clears Champat Rai, Opposition questions probe

The Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing alleged theft and irregularities in donations at the Ayodhya Ram Temple has given a clean chit to former Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust general secretary Champat Rai and former Trust member Anil Mishra, according to the final report submitted to the temple Trust.

The development comes nearly two months after allegations of donation-related irregularities triggered a political storm and led both Rai and Mishra to step down from their positions on 27 June.

The Uttar Pradesh Home Department submitted the SIT's final report to the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust on Monday for further action. The report clears Rai and Mishra of wrongdoing, while the criminal case against eight other accused remains in place.

How the probe began

The three-member SIT was constituted by the Uttar Pradesh government on 13 June following a request from the temple Trust. Lucknow divisional commissioner Vijay Vishwas Pant headed the team, with inspector general of police Kiran S. and special secretary (finance) Neel Ratan Kumar as its other members.

The panel submitted its preliminary findings to the state government on 23 June. Acting on those findings, Trust member Krishnamohan filed a police complaint at the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi police station on 25 June, leading to an FIR against eight named individuals and others.

The accused named in the FIR are Avinash Shukla, Anukalp Mishra, Lavkush Mishra, Manish Kumar Yadav, Karunesh Pandey, Ramashankar Mishra, Subhash Srivastava and Ram Shankar Yadav alias Tinnu. All eight have been arrested and booked under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Rai says he acted after spotting alleged wrongdoing

During questioning, Rai reportedly denied involvement in the alleged irregularities and told investigators that he had himself lodged a complaint after becoming aware of the suspected theft.

He maintained that ensuring transparency in donation collection was part of his responsibility and that he acted against those allegedly involved once the irregularities came to light.

The final report therefore draws a distinction between the alleged theft itself and the accountability of senior Trust officials, clearing Rai and Mishra while the investigation into the arrested accused continues.

Opposition questions the clean chit

The clean chit is unlikely to end the political controversy.

The Congress has previously questioned the basis on which senior Trust functionaries were being cleared and demanded an independent probe into the allegations. Congress spokesperson Supriya Shrinate had called for a CBI investigation under the supervision of a sitting Supreme Court judge, while also questioning the credibility of the Trust's internal handling of the matter.

The party has also criticised what it described as attempts by the RSS and the Trust to shield senior functionaries. Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh earlier termed the RSS's defence of the Trust “disgraceful and shameful”, while Pawan Khera accused the organisation of protecting senior figures while allowing others to bear the blame.

The Aam Aadmi Party, too, has questioned the transparency of the probe and previously demanded a more impartial investigation into the allegations surrounding the Trust.

Supreme Court keeps spotlight on investigation

The controversy has also reached the Supreme Court, which has asked the SIT to submit a status report and take the investigation to its logical conclusion.

The latest SIT report may clear two prominent Trust figures, but questions over the alleged theft, the functioning of the donation-collection system and the accountability of those responsible for oversight are likely to continue.

For the Trust, the immediate challenge is now to demonstrate that the clean chit is backed by a transparent and credible investigation — and that the devotees whose offerings are at the heart of the controversy receive clear answers about how the alleged irregularities occurred in the first place.

With IANS inputs