Ram Mandir Donation Scandal: Trust Officials Resign Amid Probe
Probe into alleged theft and embezzlement of Ram Mandir donations leads to resignations of key trust officials.

Top Summary
- What happened: Key officials of the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust have resigned following allegations of financial mismanagement and security lapses related to temple donations.
- Why it matters: The scandal raises serious questions about the integrity of financial handling at one of India's most prominent religious sites.
- What changes: An ongoing SIT investigation is scrutinizing financial processes and personnel appointments, with potential legal actions to follow.
- Who is affected: The resignations impact the leadership of the trust overseeing the Ram Mandir, and the investigation involves former members and bank officials.
Probe Intensifies in Ram Mandir Donation Case
The alleged theft and embezzlement of donations at the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Mandir has taken a significant turn, with former trust member Dr. Anil Mishra now under scrutiny.
A Special Investigation Team (SIT) report has implicated Dr. Mishra in financial and security management lapses. Consequently, his resignation was accepted at a trust meeting on July 6.
Financial Irregularities and Security Lapses Cited
According to the SIT report, Dr. Mishra played a crucial role in decisions concerning the management of donation funds, cash collection, and security protocols. The investigation highlighted laxity in biometric checks, frisking, and other security procedures.
It is alleged that corrective measures were not taken promptly despite awareness of these irregularities. The investigation also extends to the recruitment process for temple staff.
Recruitment Process Under Scanner
Agencies are questioning employee appointments, with scrutiny on Dr. Anil Mishra's alleged recommendations for several temple-related positions. Allegations of commission-taking for job placements are also being investigated.
Dr. Anil Mishra had resigned from his post on June 27, and his resignation was formally accepted during the July 6 trust meeting. In the same meeting, the resignation of former General Secretary Champat Rai was also accepted.
Champat Rai Questions SBI and Dr. Anil Mishra's Role
Breaking his silence, Champat Rai raised concerns in a letter to the SIT regarding donation fund accounting and security arrangements. His letter, which has gone viral on social media, reportedly questions the roles of the State Bank of India (SBI) and Dr. Anil Mishra.
He expressed objections to the calculation process guidelines issued on February 6, 2025, stating they were prepared with joint consent from the trust and the bank, bearing signatures of Dr. Mishra and bank officials, but not his own.
He also referenced a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the trust and the bank dated February 9, 2024, which stipulated security measures like CCTV cameras and reinforced doors for donation fund safety.
However, there has been no official response from the trust or the SIT regarding the viral letter.
Accused in Custody for 40 Hours
The court has granted a 40-hour police remand for the accused arrested in the temple donation theft and embezzlement case: Lavkush Mishra, Ankalp Mishra, and Karunesh Pandey. The investigating officer had sought a seven-day remand.
During the investigation, mobile data, call detail records, and bank transactions of the accused are being analyzed. The scope of the inquiry has now expanded to include bullion traders and certain land deals involving the trust.
Treasurer Denies Involvement, Refuses to Resign
Addressing questions about his role, Treasurer Swami Govind Dev Giri stated that the management of donations from the donation box fell under the General Secretary's purview. His responsibility was limited to accounting for funds deposited in bank accounts.
He asserted that Champat Rai resigned on moral grounds and is innocent. Swami Govind Dev Giri clearly stated that he would not resign from his position.
The SIT's further investigation will determine the extent of responsibility for the alleged irregularities and outline subsequent legal actions.
