The investigation into the alleged embezzlement of donations made by devotees at the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya has now reached the top levels of the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust. On Monday, former
Trust general secretary Champat Rai was questioned by the Ayodhya Police for nearly two hours as investigators attempted to reconstruct the entire chain through which cash donations moved, from the moment devotees dropped money into donation boxes until it was counted and deposited in banks. The questioning comes days after the arrest of several individuals accused of siphoning off temple donations and amid an expanding investigation that now includes bank officials and Trust functionaries.
Read More: Ram Temple Donation Scam: Champat Rai Questioned For Over 3 Hours, Denies Role In Alleged Embezzlement
Police maintain that Rai is not an accused at this stage. Instead, investigators describe him as one of the most crucial witnesses because he oversaw many of the administrative systems governing the temple’s finances during the period under investigation. His statement is expected to help establish whether the alleged theft resulted from individual misconduct or deeper procedural failures.
What The Ram Mandir Donation Case Is About
The case surfaced after allegations emerged that cash offerings made by devotees at the Ram Mandir were being systematically siphoned off over a prolonged period. According to investigators, employees entrusted with handling donations allegedly manipulated the counting and deposit process to divert money before it reached official bank accounts.
So far, police have arrested eight accused, recovered a substantial amount of cash, and launched a wider probe into the temple’s financial management. Investigators suspect nearly Rs 7 crore in devotees’ cash offerings may have been siphoned off over a period of time. This is the figure around which the SIT probe is centred. Police have so far recovered Rs 79.85 lakh during raids linked to the accused. The accused are: Avinash Shukla, Anukalp Mishra, Lavkush Mishra, Manish Kumar Yadav, Karunesh Pandey, Ramashankar Mishra, Subhash Srivastava and Ramashankar Yadav alias Tinnu Yadav.
Investigators have also sought five years of banking records from seven banks, examined CCTV footage, questioned State Bank of India officials and expanded the probe beyond the accused employees to understand whether supervisory lapses enabled the alleged embezzlement. Police have also issued notices to Trust members Anil Mishra and Gopal Rao as part of the ongoing investigation.
Against this backdrop, Champat Rai’s testimony assumed particular significance as the police aimed at four big questions:
1. How exactly were donations received, counted and deposited?
The primary focus of the questioning was understanding the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) governing temple donations. According to a Times of India report, investigators sought a step-by-step explanation of how cash moved after devotees placed money into donation boxes. They wanted to know who authorised the opening of donation boxes, who remained present during counting, how the cash was verified, documented and packed, and how it eventually reached the designated bank accounts.
Police are trying to identify whether any stage in this chain had vulnerabilities that could have been exploited by the accused. According to officials, Rai explained the procedures that had been put in place for receiving, counting and depositing donations during his tenure.
2. Who was responsible at every stage of handling temple funds?
Investigators also tried to establish accountability. The report says police questioned Rai about the officials, employees and outsourced personnel responsible for each part of the donation management process. They sought clarity on who exercised administrative control, who supervised the counting teams, who maintained records and who was authorised to transport cash to banks.
The answers are expected to help investigators determine whether responsibilities were clearly assigned or whether gaps in oversight allowed the alleged fraud to continue undetected.
3. Were there any warning signs or irregularities noticed earlier?
Another important line of questioning centred on whether the Trust had detected anomalies before the alleged embezzlement became public. Investigators reportedly wanted to know if discrepancies had ever emerged during internal reconciliations, audits or routine verification exercises and whether any complaints or suspicions had previously been brought to the attention of senior Trust officials.
This aspect has gained importance following reports suggesting that concerns about possible irregularities may have surfaced before the matter entered the public domain. Police are examining the timeline to understand when suspicions first arose and what action followed.
4. How closely did the Trust coordinate with banks?
Since the investigation now extends to banking procedures, police also questioned Rai about the Trust’s interaction with banks handling temple deposits.
Investigators wanted details of the process followed after cash left the temple premises, including documentation, deposit protocols and coordination with bank officials. The questioning comes as police simultaneously examine officials of the State Bank of India branch linked to the temple’s accounts and seek records from multiple banks to match deposits with donation collections.
The objective is to identify whether any mismatch occurred between the money counted inside the temple and the amount ultimately credited to official accounts.
Probe Widens
The investigation has increasingly shifted from identifying individual perpetrators to examining whether institutional lapses allowed the alleged diversion of donations to continue.
The Special Investigation Team has already pointed to procedural deficiencies in the handling of donations, while police continue scrutinising banking records, CCTV footage, digital evidence and witness statements. Investigators are expected to question more Trust officials and employees as they attempt to establish whether the alleged embezzlement was an isolated conspiracy or indicative of broader failures in financial oversight.
For now, Champat Rai’s statement is being treated as a key piece of the investigation, helping police reconstruct how one of India’s most closely watched religious institutions managed the vast donations made daily by millions of devotees.
