Ayodhya Ram Temple Donation Theft Case: SIT Probes SBI Role, Questions Officials Over Alleged Lapses

Ayodhya Ram Temple Donation Theft Case: SIT Probes SBI Role, Questions Officials Over Alleged Lapses

The SIT probing alleged theft of donations from the Ram Temple has questioned officials at SBI’s Ayodhya Dham branch and collected bank records of accused staff. Investigators are examining whether warning signs of embezzlement were ignored and tracing the money trail. The probe widened after a security guard reportedly flagged suspicious activity during cash counting.

BISWAJEET BANERJEEUpdated: Monday, June 29, 2026, 08:25 PM IST
Ayodhya Ram Temple Donation Theft Case: SIT Probes SBI Role, Questions Officials Over Alleged Lapses
SIT officials question SBI staff at Ayodhya Dham branch as probe into alleged Ram Temple donation theft intensifies | X

Ayodhya, June 29: The Special Investigation Team probing the alleged theft of donations at the Ram Temple on Monday reached the State Bank of India's Ayodhya Dham branch, shifting the focus of the investigation from the arrested counting staff to a more uncomfortable question: did the bank know that money was being siphoned off from the temple's donation boxes and fail to act in time?

SIT reaches SBI probe

The SIT questioned senior SBI officials, including the branch manager, and collected bank statements of seven of the eight arrested accused. Investigators are now examining the money trail and trying to establish whether there were warning signs that were ignored despite suspicions of theft.

Sources said the alleged embezzlement first came to light not through an audit or internal vigilance mechanism but because of a security guard's alertness. During one of the counting sessions inside the temple premises, one of the counting staff allegedly attempted to hide cash in a toilet. The suspicious act was noticed by the guard, leading to a closer scrutiny of the counting process and eventually exposing the alleged scam.

SBI under scanner

The revelation has put SBI under the scanner.

According to sources, the bank had suspected irregularities in the donation counting process nearly three months ago and had recommended the removal of the staff involved in handling the cash. However, the employees continued to remain on duty.

Accused identified

Of the eight arrested accused, six were outsourced personnel engaged through an agency working for SBI. They have been identified as Anukalp Mishra, Lavkush Mishra, Manish Kumar Yadav, Ramashankar Mishra, Avnish and Karunesh Shukla.

"They were not employees of the Ram Mandir Trust."

The other two arrested accused, Ram Shankar Yadav alias Tinnu and Subhash Srivastava, were not directly involved in counting the donations but are alleged to have played other roles in the conspiracy. Investigators are probing their links with the counting staff and examining whether they benefited from the diversion of funds.

Also Watch:

SBI staff under probe

The SIT is also examining the role of two SBI employees, Ratnesh and Gagandeep, who supervised the outsourced staff during the counting process. Both were regular bank employees and were present in the counting rooms when donations were being counted before being deposited into the trust's account.

Sources said investigators have obtained evidence pointing towards their possible involvement in the alleged embezzlement. Their role is being examined to determine whether the theft took place under their watch or with their knowledge.

Appointment and trust changes

The probe has also brought the process of appointments under scrutiny. Investigators are looking into allegations that several personnel engaged in the counting work were appointed through recommendations and without proper police verification.

The controversy has already triggered major changes within the temple trust, with Champat Rai and Anil Mishra stepping down from their positions.

As the investigation reaches the doors of SBI, the Ram Temple donation scam is no longer just about eight arrested men. It has become a larger inquiry into whether red flags were ignored and whether an opportunity to stop the theft months ago was allowed to slip away.