The Special Investigation Team (SIT), which is probing the alleged irregularities in the offerings in the Ram temple of Ayodhya, has said in its initial report that due to serious negligence in security arrangements and violation of fixed rules in the donation counting room of the temple, alleged theft of cash kept happening repeatedly. After the report, many things have started coming out openly.
According to Hindustan Times, this preliminary report of the SIT was presented in the meeting of Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust on Monday. The report has recommended registering a criminal case against six employees who counted the donations. All of them have already been arrested. It has also been recommended to investigate the role of officers and other responsible people monitoring the security arrangements.
What does the report say?
According to the report, around 70 such incidents were revealed in the CCTV footage available between April 27 and June 5, 2026, in which employees counting donations were allegedly seen hiding wads of notes and cash in their clothes, pockets and shoes. SIT says that this shows that this alleged theft was not a one-time incident, but was happening continuously and repeatedly.
The investigating agency says that the actual amount of alleged embezzlement could be much more, because the CCTV recordings before April 27 were automatically deleted due to low storage. The report said that the statements of the accused and investigation of their bank accounts also indicated that such incidents may have happened even before the available footage.
What did the SIT say?
The SIT has named Avinash Shukla, Anukalp Mishra, Lavkush Mishra, Manish Kumar Yadav, Karunesh Pandey and Ramashankar Mishra as the six people against whom prima facie evidence has been found of involvement in the alleged theft on the basis of CCTV footage, recovery and financial evidence. The report said that Avinash Shukla and Manish Kumar Yadav were seen hiding the cash several times, while the rest of the accused were found allegedly helping or facilitating the theft. All six accused are currently in jail.
Was the amount recovered even before the formation of SIT?
The report also said that even before the formation of the SIT, the temple trust had recovered about Rs 2.79 crore in cash, foreign currency, jewelery and other valuables from people involved in the process of counting donations. Apart from this, on June 4, Rs 2.25 lakh was also recovered from the toilet located near the donation counting room.
What is the difference between bank account and declared income?
The SIT also found a huge difference between the declared income of the accused and the amount deposited in their bank accounts. According to investigation, the monthly income of the employees counting donations was around Rs 20 thousand, out of which after deduction they got around Rs 15 thousand. Despite this, large amounts of cash deposits, fixed deposits and other financial transactions were found in his accounts. The investigating agency believes that the allegedly withdrawn amount was deposited through the bank accounts of the accused and their relatives.
How was the SOP violated?
The report said that the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) jointly prepared by the Trust and the State Bank of India for handling the offerings in the temple was violated on a large scale. Mandatory frisking was not conducted at entry and exit points, uniform without pockets was not enforced, employees were allowed to carry personal belongings inside, biometric attendance system was not effective, amounts in different donation boxes were mixed before counting, denomination wise records were not maintained and CCTV surveillance was not effectively utilised. The SIT says that all these shortcomings together created such an environment due to which alleged theft of donation money kept happening again and again.
How were questions raised on the role of officials?
Questions have also been raised in the report on the role of senior officials of the Trust. According to the report, Anil Mishra had represented the trust in preparing the SOP in collaboration with the bank, but despite being aware that searches and other security measures were not followed, he did not implement the system effectively. In the report, senior level responsibility for this negligence has been fixed on him. Anil Mishra has now resigned from his post.
The SIT has also held Subhash Srivastava, in-charge of the donation counting room, responsible for serious negligence. The report states that he did not ensure that the employees were searched, did not monitor them and did not ensure that security rules were followed.
How were questions raised on Tinnu’s role?
Questions have also been raised on the role of Ramashankar Yadav alias Tinnu in the report. According to investigation, he had the keys to the donation boxes without any formal permission. He had also recommended the appointment of his relative Manish Kumar Yadav, who was later found to be involved in the alleged theft.
Was the SOP changed?
SIT has also raised questions on the changes made in the SOP in February 2025. According to the report, earlier there was a rule of mandatory search, but later it was changed to “regular or random check”. The investigating agency says that even this loose rule was not followed properly.
The report also said that several shortcomings in the donation management system were repeatedly pointed out in the internal audit reports from the year 2022-23 to 2025-26. These included recommendations like negligence in record keeping, lack of CCTV coverage and keeping the recordings of surveillance cameras safe for 180 days. But reportedly no action was taken on these suggestions.
What did SIT say on the allegations of silver bricks?
However, the SIT also clarified that the allegations made on social media about the disappearance of silver bricks and other precious offerings could not be confirmed. After checking the records and physical verification of the trust, it was found that complete records of silver and other valuables existed and they were recorded as per the prescribed procedure. The Trust also said on Monday that the records of all valuables are safe and those who have donated can be shown this record if needed.
Against whom does the initial report of SIT recommend registering a case?
SIT clarified that this is only a preliminary report. It has been recommended to register a case against six accused under sections of theft, criminal breach of trust, criminal embezzlement, possession of stolen property, criminal conspiracy and other related sections. Besides, it has also been recommended to investigate the allegations of conspiracy, cooperation in crime, common intention and serious dereliction of duty against Subhash Srivastava, Ramashankar Yadav alias Tinnu and other monitoring officers.
The SIT has said that the investigation into issues related to administrative accountability, institutional shortcomings, management of gold and silver offerings and long-term reforms is still ongoing. The final report will be submitted after the investigation is completed. The state government has given time till July 15 to submit the final report to the SIT.
Comments are closed.