The alleged misappropriation of donations at the Ram Temple has revealed what investigators describe as a nexus involving cash-counting personnel, influential individuals, and insiders responsible for handling the temple’s offerings. According to the investigation, an SBI official had flagged irregularities in the donation-counting process nearly three months before the case surfaced publicly.
The officer reportedly observed that several counting personnel had remained assigned to the same duty for an unusually long period and recommended their replacement as a precautionary measure. Acting on the recommendation, the outsourcing agency responsible for deploying staff initiated the process of replacing them.
FCRF’s Flagship Cyber Law Certification Returns With a New Four-Week Cohort
However, according to the investigation, senior office-bearers associated with the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust allegedly intervened to prevent the removal of the workers. Facing pressure from influential quarters, bank officials were reportedly unable to implement the proposed changes, allowing the alleged theft to continue.
Investigators identified several individuals who were regularly involved in the donation-counting process, including Anukalp Mishra, Lavkush Mishra, Manish Kumar Yadav, Ramashankar Mishra, Avnish, Karunesh Shukla and others. According to the probe, many of these individuals were allegedly close associates or relatives of influential members connected with the trust. Although their salaries were paid through the bank, investigators claim they functioned under the influence of powerful figures linked to the temple administration.
When efforts were made to replace the counting staff, they allegedly approached senior trust functionaries for support. The investigation claims that Trust General Secretary Champat Rai, trust member Anil Mishra and construction aide Gopal Rao opposed their removal, resulting in the replacement process being halted. Officials reportedly feared administrative repercussions if they acted independently and therefore did not pursue further action.
Investigators believe the alleged fraud could have been detected much earlier had the recommendations made by bank officials been implemented. Instead, the failure to replace the staff allegedly emboldened those involved, who believed they enjoyed the protection of influential individuals. The inquiry has also brought up the name of Tinnu Yadav, who is alleged to have lobbied on behalf of the counting personnel because his nephew was reportedly among those involved and was allegedly benefiting financially from the scheme.
The investigation has also widened to include bank employees responsible for supervising the donation-counting process. According to preliminary findings by the police and the Special Investigation Team (SIT), two bank employees—Ratnesh Chaturvedi and Gagandeep—are suspected of being actively involved in the alleged embezzlement.
Both employees were assigned to oversee the counting of donations and ensure that the collected funds were deposited into the bank. Investigators allege that instead of preventing irregularities, they facilitated the operation. Police sources claim they have gathered substantial evidence against the two employees, and arrests could follow as the investigation progresses.
The inquiry has further revealed the alleged method used to siphon off money. Investigators say cash was often removed directly from the counting room. In cases where that was not possible, the accused allegedly manipulated official records by deliberately recording the total collection as ₹4–5 lakh less than the actual amount. Once the cash reached the bank for deposit, the difference could allegedly be withdrawn without immediately raising suspicion.
Investigators are also examining the possible role of a senior bank official whose conduct has come under scrutiny during the probe. Authorities say forensic examination of documents, financial records and other evidence is continuing, and further legal action will depend on the findings of the ongoing investigation.
