Millions of people gave money to build and run the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya. Some gave a hundred rupees. Some gave gold. Some gave silver, shaped by hand and carried across the country as an act of devotion. All of them trusted that their gift would go where it was meant to go.
In June 2026, that trust was shaken. A former staff member said money was going missing from the counting room where donations are sorted. Devotees started asking where their silver and gold had gone. Within two weeks, the state government had formed a special team to investigate, police had filed a case, and eight people were in custody.
This is not a simple story with one villain. It has real arrests, real resignations, and real unanswered questions. It also has a lot of political noise — claims made in press conferences that go far beyond what has actually been proven in any report or court filing. This guide separates the two, clearly, so you know exactly what is fact and what is still just a claim.
What Actually Happened — In Plain Words
No jargon. Just the simple version of events, in order.
The Ram Mandir is run by a trust called the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust. This Trust was set up by the central government in February 2020 to build and manage the temple. It collects huge amounts of cash, gold, and silver from devotees every single day.
The temple has 35 donation boxes. When they are full, the cash is moved in locked iron trunks to a counting centre about 200 metres away. There, workers sort the notes, coins, and small jewellery. On a normal day, the temple collects roughly ₹8 to 13 lakh. During big festivals, that can jump to ₹50–60 lakh in a single day.
How the Case Started
Mahipal Singh, who used to be in charge of the Trust's accounts team, said he noticed the counting staff were putting more notes into bundles than they were writing down on the official paperwork. He raised this internally. According to his own public account, he was later moved out of his role after he flagged it — not the staff he had complained about.
The issue stayed quiet for years. Then, in June 2026, a former Ayodhya MLA named Pawan Pandey said that ₹7 to 7.5 crore in donations had gone missing. That claim, combined with growing public pressure, forced the Uttar Pradesh government to act.
The Investigation Moves Fast
On June 13–14, 2026, the state government set up a three-member Special Investigation Team, known as the SIT, at the Trust's own request. The SIT worked quickly. By June 23, it had handed in a preliminary report. Two days later, on June 25, police registered an FIR — a formal criminal complaint — based on a complaint by Krishna Mohan, who is himself a member of the Trust.
The very next day, June 26, police arrested eight people connected to the counting operation, including some bank staff. That same day, two of the Trust's most senior office-bearers — General Secretary Champat Rai and trustee Anil Mishra — resigned, saying they were taking "moral responsibility." Neither man has been arrested. Neither is named in the FIR. Rai has denied any role in the theft.
How the Money Allegedly Went Missing
The counting room, the bundles, and how ordinary staff members are said to have made crores
The counting work happens in two shifts a day, with about 20 workers in each shift. According to the original complaint, staff were supposed to make bundles of exactly 100 notes. The allegation is that some workers slipped a few extra notes into certain bundles, wrote down "100" anyway, and later pulled the extra notes back out before the bundles were sealed for the bank.
This is, so far, an allegation from the original complaint — not something an independent report has confirmed in detail. What is confirmed is that opposition leader Arvind Kejriwal has publicly claimed that hidden cameras caught theft happening 70 times in 40 days, and that around 7 to 8 months of CCTV footage from the counting room was deleted before new staff took over. These specific numbers come from Kejriwal's press statements and have not been independently confirmed by an official report at the time of writing.
The Lifestyle Change That Raised Questions
What is not in dispute is that some of the counting staff earned modest government-linked wages — in the range of ₹14,000 to ₹20,000 a month — yet appeared to live far beyond that income in recent years. This mismatch is part of why suspicion grew, and it is one of the reasons investigators moved quickly once the complaint was filed.
Arvind Kejriwal has said theft was caught on camera 70 times in 40 days, and that 7–8 months of CCTV footage was deleted. These are Kejriwal's public claims. No official SIT report confirming these exact figures has been made public.
The Missing Silver, Gold & Jewellery
What devotees say they gave — and what they were never given in return: a receipt
The 200 Silver Bricks
On January 26, 2021, members of the global Sindhi community — from twelve countries — brought 200 silver bricks to Ayodhya. Each brick weighed about one kilogram and carried the image of Jhulelal, a deity important to the Sindhi community. The bricks were handed directly to Champat Rai at a Trust facility called Karsevakpuram.
No receipt was given at the time. The community says they were told the silver would first be checked, and that they would be informed later how it was used. Five years on, they still don't have an answer.
Dr. Raju V. Manwani, who represented the Sindhi donors, has said the community is not concluding the silver was stolen — only that they want a receipt and clarity on how it was used. He has asked the SIT to look into this specific donation as part of its investigation.
Other Devotees Come Forward
Once the story broke, more people came forward with similar concerns:
- Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut said his party never received a receipt for a ₹1 crore donation it made to the Trust.
- A woman devotee said she gave a silver idol of Kakabhushundi that was displayed at the temple for months — and then simply disappeared, with no receipt ever issued.
- Shiv Sena (UBT) leaders separately raised questions about silver items donated by their leader, Uddhav Thackeray, which they say also cannot be accounted for.
The Trust's response, through treasurer Mahant Govindgiri, is that all valuables donated to the temple are safe and that receipts exist in the Trust's own records. This is the Trust's official position — it has not yet been independently checked against every donor's claim.
"The valuables donated to Lord Ram are safe, with receipts in the temple's custody," Trust treasurer Mahant Govindgiri said in the Trust's first official statement on the matter.
The Land Deals — Two Very Different Stories
Same facts, two opposite explanations. Here is both, side by side.
Land bought for the temple's expansion has been the single most argued-over part of this whole case. Here is the plainest version of what happened, and then both sides' explanation for it.
The Facts Both Sides Agree On
In 2021, the Trust bought a piece of land near Ayodhya railway station from a man named Sultan Ansari for ₹18.5 crore, to build facilities for pilgrims. Records show Ansari had bought the same land two years earlier, in 2019, from its original owner for around ₹2 crore. Both sale documents — the 2019 one and the 2021 one — were registered on the same day, a few minutes apart, because the Trust wanted both transactions on record to prove a clean chain of ownership.
What the Opposition Says
Land worth just ₹2 crore was sold to the Trust for ₹18.5 crore, with both documents signed minutes apart — which they say looks like a deliberate price inflation to move Trust money into private hands. They have demanded a CBI and ED probe into this and other land deals, some involving figures as high as ₹95 crore for land they value at ₹14 crore.
What the Trust's Side Says
The land's value rose sharply between 2019 and 2021 because of the Supreme Court's Ayodhya verdict and the temple's ground-breaking ceremony, which pushed up prices all across the area. The two-year gap between purchase and resale — not "minutes," as sometimes suggested — explains most of the price jump. Both deeds were registered on the same day only to legally establish the chain of title, and all documents are on the public record.
There is also a separate land issue reported by The Quint: government-owned ("Nazul") land that had, through a revenue board ruling, been returned from a local seer's name — and which the Trust then agreed to pay that same seer ₹23 crore for. This raised fresh questions about how land around the temple is being valued and acquired, and is a newer thread in the same broader story.
Both the "was this a scam" and "was this normal appreciation" explanations are currently just that — competing explanations. No court has ruled on either land deal as of this writing.
Who Is Involved — The People Behind the Names
Arrested, resigned, or under scrutiny — here is exactly where each person stands today
The 8 People Arrested (June 26, 2026)
All eight worked in or around the temple's donation-counting process, including some State Bank of India staff. They are: Ramshankar Yadav (known as Tinnu Yadav), Anukalp Mishra, Lavkush Mishra, Avinash Shukla, Manish Kumar Yadav, Karunesh Pandey, Ramashankar Mishra, and Subhash Srivastava. All eight were sent to judicial custody by a special court in Ayodhya. They have been charged, not convicted — the case against them is still being heard.
The Political Fight — Both Sides, Fairly
This case has become a major political battle. Here is what each side is actually saying, in their own words.
Because the Ram Mandir is closely tied to the ruling BJP's identity, this case has turned into one of the biggest political flashpoints of the year — especially with Uttar Pradesh state elections expected in February–March 2027. Here is what each side says, clearly separated.
What Opposition Leaders Are Saying
Kejriwal has said only "small" employees have been arrested while the "big names" are protected. He has claimed — citing unnamed sources — that the Intelligence Bureau sent 12 reports to Prime Minister Modi about irregularities at the temple. He has been careful to add: "We are not saying that the money reached PM Modi. We have no evidence for that." He has also called the FIR a "farzi" (fake) move meant only to look like action.
Alleged a scam of nearly ₹20,000 crore linked to the temple, and claimed that 50 kg each of gold and silver, along with diamond necklaces, had gone missing without being reflected in official records.
What the Government and the Trust Are Saying
"As soon as the SIT report was released, action was initiated immediately," Adityanath said, adding that anyone found guilty "will face the law" with "no exemption" for anyone. He pushed back on opposition criticism directly: "If there is no evidence, stop the propaganda. If there is evidence, submit it before the SIT."
The VHP's International President, senior advocate Alok Kumar, sent a formal letter to the police investigating officer asking that Arvind Kejriwal, Ram Gopal Yadav, Sanjay Singh, and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra be questioned and asked to provide proof for their public claims — including the ₹20,000 crore figure and the claim that 50 kg of gold and 50 kg of silver are missing.
This back-and-forth is important context: as things stand, the confirmed loss (around ₹7–7.5 crore in the original complaint, with ₹79.85 lakh recovered) is far smaller than the political claims flying around (₹200 crore, ₹20,000 crore). Neither of the larger figures has been confirmed by any court or official report. Readers should treat both the accusation and the much larger numbers with the same caution until a formal report says otherwise.
Full Timeline — Step by Step
Every confirmed date in the case, from the first silver donation to today
Confirmed, Alleged, or Disputed?
A quick-glance list so you never have to wonder which is which
Your Questions, Answered Simply
The most common questions people are searching about this case
The 8 accused remain in judicial custody as their case proceeds in court. The Trust board has not yet formally accepted the resignations of Champat Rai or Anil Mishra — that decision is expected around July 11, 2026. As of today, the VHP has demanded opposition politicians prove their larger claims, and no independent report has confirmed figures beyond the original ₹7–7.5 crore complaint.
The Postmortems will update this page as the case develops — including the Trust board's decision, any new chargesheet, and the outcome of the VHP's demand for proof from opposition leaders. Check back for updates.