The investigation into the high-profile Ram Temple donation theft case has widened after fresh findings suggested that some employees assigned to count donation cash may have been appointed through alleged recommendations rather than a routine recruitment process. The Special Investigation Team (SIT) is now closely examining the recruitment procedure, the role of bank officials, and related documents.
According to the preliminary investigation, the State Bank of India (SBI) had engaged Varanasi-based Sainik Security Services to collect and count cash received from the temple’s donation boxes. The company deployed 25 personnel for the assignment. Investigators, however, found that most of those employees were residents of Ayodhya and nearby areas, despite the company being registered in Varanasi.
The six arrested accused—Anukalp Mishra, Lavkush Mishra, Karunesh Pandey, Avinash Shukla, Manish Yadav, and Ramashankar Mishra—have been identified as employees of the security company. In addition, Ramshankar Yadav alias Tinnu and Subhash Chandra Srivastava have also been named as accused in the case.
Registration Begins for FutureCrime Summit 2026, India’s Largest Cybercrime Conference
According to sources associated with the investigation, the company’s owner allegedly told investigators during questioning that the appointments were made through recommendations routed via certain trustees and bank officials, while the company’s role was largely limited to a formal arrangement. However, these claims have not yet been independently verified by the investigating agencies and remain part of the ongoing probe.
Investigators believe that if the alleged irregularities in the recruitment process are substantiated, they could indicate that the theft was part of a pre-planned conspiracy. Accordingly, the SIT is examining appointment records, banking documents, digital evidence, and witness statements to establish how the personnel were selected and whether the process was manipulated.
Sources further indicated that the role of two SBI employees has also come under scrutiny during the investigation. Police are reviewing their responsibilities, decisions, and available evidence. If sufficient evidence emerges, legal action may also be initiated against them. However, no official confirmation has yet been issued by the police regarding their involvement.
The investigation has also raised questions regarding the role of accused Ramshankar Yadav alias Tinnu. Investigators are examining allegations that although he was assigned duties related to the temple’s sanctum management, he had unrestricted access to the highly sensitive cash-counting room. Authorities are trying to determine who authorised his entry and whether any lapses occurred in the security and monitoring protocols.
Similarly, investigators are examining the role of retired banker Subhash Chandra Srivastava, who was responsible for supervising the cash-counting room. The probe is focused on whether all required procedures, eligibility criteria, and institutional safeguards were followed before assigning him such a sensitive responsibility.
The investigation remains ongoing. The police and the SIT are analysing banking records, CCTV footage, digital evidence, recruitment documents, and witness statements to reconstruct the sequence of events. Officials have stated that the exact roles of those involved will become clear only after all evidence has been thoroughly examined. The guilt or innocence of any accused person will ultimately be determined by the court based on the evidence presented during judicial proceedings.
