Ram Temple Donation Theft: SIT Report Reveals 105 Unauthorised Removals

A Supreme Court Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant announced on Monday, September 21, 2026, that a status report submitted by the Uttar Pradesh government’s Special Investigation Team (SIT) has identified 105 instances of unauthorised currency removal captured on CCTV in the Ram Temple donations misappropriation case. Appearing for the Uttar Pradesh government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta stated that the probe has been substantially concluded and a chargesheet will be filed before the jurisdictional Additional Sessions Judge on or before September 25, 2026.

Investigation Details and Chargesheet Timeline

According to the Supreme Court Bench, the SIT investigation relied extensively on CCTV footage to identify the accused persons, followed by recoveries, forensic examinations, and audits. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta pointed out that the 90-day statutory period for investigation, which commenced with the first arrest in the case, concludes on September 25. After this deadline, the accused persons become entitled to default bail. The court noted from the status report that the role of every person allegedly involved has been assessed.

Did You Know? The three-member SIT is headed by Lucknow Divisional Commissioner Vijay Vishwas Pant and was originally constituted by the State government on June 13 at the request of the Trust, prior to intervention by the Supreme Court. Range Inspector General Kiran S. and Special Secretary (Finance) Neel Ratan Kumar serve as the other members of the committee.

Legal Proceedings and Court Transparency

The First Information Report names eight individuals—Avinash Shukla, Anukalp Mishra, Lavkush Mishra, Manish Kumar Yadav, Karunesh Pandey, Ramashankar Mishra, Subhash Srivastava, and Ram Shankar Yadav alias Tinnu—along with other unidentified individuals. During the hearing, senior advocate Ravi Shankar Jandhyala, representing petitioner Ajay Kumar Rai, sought a copy of the status report. The Bench stated that the contents of the documents have been summarized and covered within the judicial order itself, prompting Mr. Jandhyala to remark that the state requires transparency.

Ram Temple Donation Theft: SIT Report Reveals 105 Unauthorised Removals

Expert Insight: The court’s insistence on filing a copy of the chargesheet directly in the apex court, alongside the proceedings before the Sessions Court, underscores the high-level judicial oversight applied to this financial misappropriation probe. While the Bench emphasized that it does not want to intervene in the jurisdiction of the Sessions Court, maintaining direct documentation in the Supreme Court ensures continuous monitoring as the statutory default bail deadline approaches.

The court noted that primary offences in the matter include criminal breach of trust and offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act. Furthermore, the court stated that the prospect of further investigation to continue under Section 193 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, remains open.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the main finding in the SIT status report?
The status report identified 105 instances of unauthorised currency removal captured on CCTV during the investigation into the Ram Temple donations misappropriation case, according to the Supreme Court Bench.

Ram Temple Donation Theft: SIT Report Reveals 105 Unauthorised Removals

When will the chargesheet be filed?
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta stated that the chargesheet will be filed before the court of the jurisdictional Additional Sessions Judge on or before September 25, 2026.

Who are the named accused individuals in the case?
The First Information Report names eight people: Avinash Shukla, Anukalp Mishra, Lavkush Mishra, Manish Kumar Yadav, Karunesh Pandey, Ramashankar Mishra, Subhash Srivastava, and Ram Shankar Yadav alias Tinnu, alongside other unidentified individuals.

How will the impending September 25 statutory deadline and default bail provisions influence the final stages of prosecution in this high-profile case?

Leave a Comment