Madras High Court: No Criminal Liability for Temple Crowdfunding

• The Madras High Court quashed an FIR against YouTuber S. Karthik Gopinath over a temple restoration crowdfunding campaign that raised Rs 33 lakh.
• The court held that collecting donations online without prior government approval does not automatically amount to cheating or criminal breach of trust.
• The prosecution failed to show evidence of dishonest intention or misappropriation by Gopinath, and the funds remained secure throughout the campaign.

The court ultimately quashed the FIR against him, holding that the prosecution had failed to show that Gopinath had dishonestly misappropriated any part of the funds or intended to cheat donors.

The Madras High Court's recent ruling on a temple crowdfunding campaign has sparked debate about the boundaries between public fundraising and criminal activity. At its core, the case revolves around YouTuber S. Karthik Gopinath, who is also a member of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP),'s online appeal for donations to restore damaged idols at Arulmigu Periyasamy Chelliamman Vagayra Temple in Siruvachur. The campaign, which raised over Rs 33 lakh through the platform Milaap, was launched after the idols were allegedly vandalized in October 2021. While the temple's authorities and the state government had initially objected to Gopinath's fundraising efforts, citing a lack of prior approval from the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR & CE) Department, the court ultimately quashed the FIR against him.

The case highlights the complexities of crowdfunding for public causes in India. While collecting donations online may invite administrative objections, it does not automatically amount to cheating or criminal breach of trust, according to the Madras High Court's ruling. The court held that the prosecution had failed to show that Gopinath had dishonestly misappropriated any part of the funds or intended to cheat donors. In fact, the investigation revealed that the money remained secure and was eventually deposited in a fixed deposit, with only one expenditure shown – payment made to a sculptor for the proposed restoration work.

The Madras High Court's decision has significant implications for lawyers advising clients on online fundraising campaigns. It underscores that merely collecting donations without prior government approval does not automatically amount to cheating or criminal breach of trust, but rather must be accompanied by evidence of dishonest intention or misappropriation. The court's ruling also highlights the importance of transparency and accountability in crowdfunding initiatives. As the case demonstrates, even if a crowdfunding campaign is launched without prior approval, it can still be legitimate as long as the funds are used for their intended purpose.

Lawyers advising clients on online fundraising campaigns should note that merely collecting donations without prior government approval does not automatically amount to cheating or criminal breach of trust, but rather must be accompanied by evidence of dishonest intention or misappropriation.

Source: Original reporting via [Source]