Supreme Court: Ram Mandir Donation Theft SIT Report Uncovers 105 Thefts

• A Special Investigation Team (SIT) has identified 105 incidents of donation theft at the Ram Mandir, confirmed by CCTV footage.
• The Supreme Court was informed that the SIT's investigation is nearing completion, with a charge sheet expected to be filed by September 25.
• The Court, led by CJI Surya Kant, previously refused to disclose the SIT report, asserting that the team is directly accountable to the bench and its findings will be reviewed internally.
• The SIT was constituted following Supreme Court directives in response to public interest litigations concerning alleged embezzlement of donations to the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust.
• The Supreme Court issued a stern warning against politicizing the proceedings, emphasizing that courts are dedicated to ensuring a fair investigation into the alleged offenses.

The Supreme Court issued a stern warning against politicizing the proceedings, emphasizing that courts are not platforms for political maneuvering but are dedicated to ensuring fair and logical conclusions to investigations.

A Special Investigation Team (SIT) has uncovered 105 instances of donation theft at the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, with these incidents captured on the temple's CCTV footage. This significant finding was presented to the Supreme Court on Monday by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who detailed the ongoing probe into the alleged Ayodhya Ram Mandir donation embezzlement before a bench presided over by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant.

The Solicitor General informed the court that the SIT's investigation is nearing its conclusion. A charge sheet is anticipated to be filed by September 25, following which the court has instructed the magistrate to proceed with legal action in accordance with established procedures. During the proceedings, the Supreme Court was also apprised of the number of arrests made in connection with the thefts and the evidence gathered, which was subsequently presented to the bench.

The Supreme Court has firmly asserted its direct oversight over the Special Investigation Team, clarifying that the body is answerable solely to the bench and its report will be meticulously reviewed before any potential public release. Last month, the Court had explicitly declined requests to disclose the SIT report, with CJI Surya Kant stating that the immediate focus remained on bringing the investigation of the First Information Report (FIR) to its logical conclusion. The Chief Justice emphasized that the SIT, which includes a forensic auditor, was constituted by the Court and would submit its status report in a sealed cover.

Despite repeated pleas from petitioners for the report's disclosure to allow for suggestions to the SIT, CJI Kant reiterated the Court's position, stressing that the petitions were solely for the purpose of ensuring a thorough investigation. This approach underscores the Court's commitment to maintaining control over sensitive inquiries, particularly those involving public trusts like the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust, while balancing transparency with the integrity of the investigative process.

The formation of the SIT stemmed from public interest litigations (PILs) filed before the Supreme Court, alleging embezzlement of donations received by the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust. In July, the Solicitor General, Tushar Mehta, informed a CJI Kant-led bench that an SIT had been formally constituted as per the Court's earlier directions. This team is chaired by Inspector General of Police Mr. Kiran S and includes a Deputy Inspector General (DIG), a Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), and an Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP).

The Court's directive for the SIT's formation followed an earlier request from the CJI Surya Kant-led bench to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to engage with the Director General of Police, Uttar Pradesh, to ensure the team's establishment. Prior to these developments, in June, the Supreme Court had declined to urgently hear one of the petitions seeking the registration of an FIR and a court-monitored investigation into the alleged misappropriation of funds. This petition, jointly filed by practicing Advocates Ajay Kumar Rai and Dinesh Kumar Yadav, sought a fair, impartial, and time-bound investigation, with counsel highlighting the serious nature of the allegations and expressing doubts about the state's handling of the matter.

Throughout the proceedings, the Supreme Court has consistently cautioned petitioners against attempting to politicize the issue. As the hearing progressed and petitioners voiced concerns regarding the investigation, a visibly displeased CJI Surya Kant issued a stern warning. The Chief Justice emphatically stated that courts are not intended for political maneuvering and that the matter should not be politicized.

The Supreme Court underscored that the case represents a straightforward instance of a prima facie commission of an offense, requiring a fair investigation that is brought to a logical conclusion. This firm stance highlights the judiciary's commitment to maintaining the sanctity of legal processes and preventing them from being swayed by external political agendas, particularly in high-profile cases involving public sentiment and significant trusts.

This development highlights the Supreme Court's active oversight of high-profile investigations involving public trusts and donations. Lawyers should note the Court's approach to SIT report disclosure and its firm caution against politicizing legal proceedings, which can inform strategy in similar public interest litigations.

Source: Reporting based on Supreme Court proceedings.