⚖️ SC Refuses Urgent Hearing on Ram Mandir Donation Probe

The Supreme Court on Monday declined urgent listing of a plea seeking a CBI-led SIT probe into alleged embezzlement of donations by the Shri Ram Janmbhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust. A bench of Justices M.M. Sundresh and Sheel Nagu questioned the urgency, asking “What’s the urgency?” and directed the matter be listed after summer vacation. Petitioners sought preservation of CCTV footage, bank records, and digital evidence, fearing tampering. Eight accused are currently in judicial custody in Ayodhya. The case remains alive — just deferred.

Read full article

Supreme Court Puts Brakes on Ram Mandir Donation Probe Plea — "What's the Urgency?"

The Supreme Court on Monday declined to grant an urgent hearing on a plea seeking the constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the alleged embezzlement of donations received by the Shri Ram Janmbhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust for the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya.

What Happened in Court?

When the matter was mentioned before a Bench of Justices M.M. Sundresh and Sheel Nagu, the petitioner pressed for urgent listing, saying the allegations were "very serious" and raising concerns over the manner in which the state government was dealing with the matter. Questioning the urgency, Justice Sundresh asked, "What's the urgency?" before directing that the plea be listed immediately after the court reopens post-summer vacation.

What Do the Petitions Demand?

The petition sought a court-monitored investigation into the alleged misappropriation of donations received by the Trust, requesting that the probe be conducted by an SIT of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) under the direct supervision of the Supreme Court.

The petitioners also sought interim directions to preserve all physical, electronic, and financial records — including donation registers, CCTV footage, bank records, and software databases — and a restraint on tampering with such material. Concern was specifically raised that electronic evidence could be tampered with before a regular hearing is scheduled.

Legal Precedent Cited

Drawing a parallel with the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam adulterated ghee case, the petition referred to the Supreme Court's October 2024 order in Subramanian Swamy v. State of Andhra Pradesh, where a State SIT was substituted with an independent multidisciplinary SIT headed by the CBI — urging a similar course of action here.

Scope of the PIL

The petition clarified that it was confined to the secular administration of donations and did not seek interference in religious rituals, customs, or denominational matters. (Prokerala) A separate petition raising similar allegations has also been filed by Advocate Narendra Kumar Goswami. The case is titled Ajay Kumar Rai v. Ram Janmbhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust, WP (Crl.) No. 241/26.

Ground Reality in Ayodhya

All eight accused in the alleged Ram Mandir donation embezzlement case were scheduled to appear before the Special Court for Corruption Act cases in Ayodhya on Monday for judicial custody proceedings. UP Police had conducted raids, recovering cash, jewellery, and financial documents.

The Supreme Court has not shut the door — it has simply deferred the matter to a regular bench post-vacation. The legal battle over transparency in temple fund management is set to intensify.