Ram Mandir donation row deepens as arrests, resignations shake trust
Champat Rai, Anil Mishra resign amid growing Ram Mandir donation row
- Eight people arrested in connection with alleged irregularities at the Ram Temple; searches reportedly recovered nearly ₹80 lakh in cash.
- FIR filed after the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust complaint; an SIT submitted a preliminary report that prompted police action.
- Champat Rai (trust general secretary) and trust member Anil Mishra reportedly resigned; Rai said he stepped down to ensure a fair probe and to protect the sanctity of the shrine.
- Named accused: Ram Shankar Yadav (Tinnu), Avinash Shukla, Anukalp Mishra, Lavkush Mishra, Subhash Srivastava, Ramashankar Mishra, Manish Yadav, Karunesh Pandey.
- Several accused are reported to be related to each other and to trust insiders, raising questions about internal controls.
- Case registered under multiple Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita sections (criminal breach of trust, cheating, theft, criminal conspiracy) and Section 13(1)(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
- Political dimension: Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath vowed swift action and linked the probe to earlier promises to expose the truth.
Allegations of irregularities around donations to the Ram Temple in Ayodhya erupted into a full‑blown crisis on Friday after the arrest of eight men, the recovery of nearly ₹80 lakh from their homes, and the reported resignations of two senior trust figures. What began as questions about missing offerings has quickly become a test of accountability at one of India’s most sensitive and symbolically charged religious sites.
The Uttar Pradesh Police filed an FIR a day earlier following a complaint by the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust. Named in the complaint were an aide to the trust’s general secretary, Champat Rai, and seven others. Authorities say searches turned up about ₹80 lakh in cash at the homes of those arrested, fueling public alarm and prompting inquiries that moved at pace after a Special Investigation Team (SIT) handed in a preliminary report.
Reports said Champat Rai and prominent trust member Anil Mishra submitted resignations; Rai is reported to have written to trust chairman Mahant Nritya Gopal Das, saying he stepped down to “ensure a free and fair probe” and to “protect the sanctity” of Lord Ram while denying personal wrongdoing and taking “moral responsibility.” At the time these developments were reported, there was no formal confirmation from the trust office. The Vishwa Hindu Parishad said it had no knowledge of Rai’s resignation, and several senior figures were unavailable for comment.
Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath took a forceful public stance, framing the action as a fulfillment of a promise to let the SIT findings determine next steps. “I had stated that action would be taken once the SIT report arrived. The report is in, and action has commenced,” he told supporters in Deoria, adding that the government would not tolerate anyone “messing with the faith.” His remarks also took aim at political opponents, underscoring how the episode is playing out not just as a criminal probe but as a charged political matter.
The FIR named eight accused: Ram Shankar Yadav (alias Tinnu), said to be a close aide of Rai; Avinash Shukla; Anukalp Mishra; Lavkush Mishra; Subhash Srivastava; Ramashankar Mishra; Manish Yadav; and Karunesh Pandey. Reporting indicates familial links among several of the accused — Anukalp and Lavkush Mishra are related to each other and to Anil Mishra; Ram Shankar Yadav and Manish Yadav are also related — a detail that raises questions about how duties and trust were delegated within the temple’s operations. Police say they have recovered cash during searches and are continuing investigations.
The legal case is being pursued under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and related statutes, covering alleged offences such as criminal breach of trust, cheating, theft and criminal conspiracy, as well as a provision of the Prevention of Corruption Act. That combination signals authorities are treating the matter with seriousness and breadth, aiming to examine both the immediate theft allegations and any wider patterns of collusion or malpractice.
Beyond the legal mechanics, the episode highlights a deeper governance problem: how high‑profile religious institutions manage large volumes of donations. In a shrine that receives vast daily offerings, lapses in counting, record‑keeping or oversight can quickly escalate into scandal. The coming weeks will test whether the inquiry yields clear accountability, institutional reforms, and public reassurance, or whether doubts will linger over one of the nation’s most potent symbols.