Ram Temple Donation Probe to Include Financial Forensic Audit, Investigate SBI Staff

New Delhi: The Uttar Pradesh government’s three-member Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe into the Ram temple donation misappropriation controversy will include a financial forensic audit, to “reconstruct the temple’s entire donation trail” since the inauguration of the temple in 2024, Hindustan Times reported on Sunday, July 5.

As per another report, the Ayodhya police are also probing the role played by staff of the State Bank of India along with that of the eight men who have been arrested in connection with the funds misappropriation, including six outsourced employees hired by a private security agency.

Many opposition members have commented and raised questions about the misappropriation of funds and demanded transparency; MP John Brittas on Saturday asked the union home minister why the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, does not apply to the trust.

Financial forensic audit to be part of SIT probe

The Uttar Pradesh government’s three-member SIT probe into the donation misappropriation controversy has now turned into a “full-fledged financial forensic audit, reconstructing the temple’s entire donation trail”, Hindustan Times reported on Sunday, July 5. The SIT has just completed two days of field investigation in Ayodhya.

HT quoted “highly placed government sources” as saying that the SIT, in an effort to see if the increase in devotees visiting the temple was proportionately reflected in the trust’s reported donation receipts, is mapping over two years of pilgrim footfall since January 2024 when the temple was inaugurated.

These will then be compared with actual bank deposits made by the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust since its inception on February 5, 2020.

Also read: SIT Probing Ram Temple Financial Irregularities Bars Trust Officials from Leaving Ayodhya

According to unnamed sources quoted by HT, financial records sought by the SIT include daily cash deposits, monthly collection trends, bank transaction statements, reconciliation reports and records of daily pilgrim arrivals – which will be examined with pilgrimage patterns during weekends, festivals, major religious occasions and the post-Prana Pratishtha surge in devotees.

Per the report, investigators will also cross-match banking records with disclosures made by the eight accused (who have already been arrested) to the police during their interrogation. These records will also be compared with statements recorded from trust functionaries, employees and other personnel who handle devotees’ offerings.

Investigations into role of SBI bank staff

According to official sources cited by HT in another report, Anoop Tripathi, chief manager of the State Bank of India’s Naya Ghat branch in Ayodhya gave his official statement on Saturday (July 4). The trust had engaged the bank for counting cash. The trust also has its savings accounts, current accounts and fixed deposits with the SBI, Bank of Baroda and Punjab National Bank, per the report.

Congress activists protest against the alleged theft of donations at the Ram Temple in Ayodhya, in Kolkata, West Bengal, July 4, 2026. Photo: PTI

HT quoted unnamed sources as saying that the Ayodhya police are now probing the role of SBI staff and that of eight arrested men, including six outsourced employees hired by a private security agency, in the investigation. Last week, the police seized Rs. 79,85,493 from the eight arrested men, recovering money from bathrooms, haystacks and cow dung cakes, per HT.

Also read: Ayodhya's Ram Temple And Six Past Charges of Alleged Corruption

Specifically, two bank staffers with the SBI who supervised the counting of cash from donation boxes at the Ram temple are being investigated. In a statement on June 28, the SBI said that it is fully cooperating with the SIT in its investigations into handling donations collected through donation boxes at the Ram temple in Ayodhya.

Meanwhile, on Saturday July 4, Uttar Pradesh Police sought custody of two men already accused in the donation controversy: the brother-in-law duo of Lavkush Mishra and Anukalp Mishra. They are related to trust member Anil Mishra who submitted his resignation to the trust on June 27.

One of the other eight accused who have been arrested also includes Ram Shankar Yadav ‘Tinnu’, who is the trust’s general secretary Champat Rai’s aide. Manish Yadav, another accused, is related to Shankar Yadav.

Need transparency: Brittas writes to home minister

Meanwhile, CPI(M) MP John Brittas wrote to Union home minister Amit Shah on July 4 urging that the government revisit its stand that the RTI Act, 2005 does not apply to the Shri Ram Janmbhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust. He pointed out many reasons as to why this is necessary.

In his letter, he noted that the Union government’s Central Information Commission had on 6 June, 2025, held that the trust was not a “public authority” within the meaning of Section 2(h) of the RTI Act. However, how can a trust brought into existence through a government-approved Scheme after an order from the Supreme Court, and entrusted with the administration of property vested in it by the Union government, “remain completely outside the framework of public accountability envisaged under the Right to Information Act”, he asked.

“Section 2(h)(d) simply refers to a body established or constituted by a government notification or order; it does not distinguish between a notification issued pursuant to a judicial direction and one issued independently by the government. The source of the obligation to issue the notification cannot alter the legal character of the notification itself. Compliance with a judicial mandate does not diminish the fact that the central government exercised statutory authority in framing the Scheme, constituting the trust and issuing the Gazette notification,” Brittas said in his letter.

Moreover, if the trust is entirely private and beyond the sphere of public accountability, why did the government consider it necessary to provide for continuing governmental representation in its governing structure, Brittas asked.

“The Modi government cannot have it both ways,” Brittas said in a post on X, in which he shared a copy of the letter he wrote to Shah. “It constituted the Shri Ram Janmbhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust through a government-approved Scheme, vested in it land acquired under a Parliamentary law, nominated serving IAS officers as government representatives to its governing framework, and claims that Govt has no role in it and the trust is beyond the purview of the RTI Act.

“Transparency cannot become a casualty merely because the Government chooses to describe a trust as 'autonomous'. Compliance with the Supreme Court's judgment does not erase the legal character of a government notification.”

He urged that the Union government reconsider its stand on the applicability of the RTI Act to the trust, and that it place its revised position before the High Court “so that the crucial question of the trust's accountability under the RTI Act receives an authoritative judicial determination”.

On July 2, Congress Lok Sabha MP and chairman Public Accounts Committee K.C. Venugopal had written to Prime Minister Narendra Modi calling for a Supreme Court-monitored investigation in the matter. Venugopal had called the controversy a “monumental betrayal of Hindu faith, religion, and way of life”.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.