The Supreme Court on Monday cautioned parties against politicising the alleged embezzlement of funds collected for the construction of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya, observing that the matter was “a simple case of commission of an offence under penal laws” and that the Court’s concern was to ensure a fair investigation. The observations came while the Court was hearing a batch of petitions relating to the probe into the alleged diversion of temple donations.
At the outset, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the Bench that a status report had been filed. On being asked who was presently investigating the case, Mehta submitted that the Special Investigation Team (SIT) had only been constituted to ascertain whether a cognizable offence was made out. Following its report, an FIR was registered and the investigation is presently being conducted by the police.
The Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana observed that it would examine the investigation and asked the Solicitor General to obtain instructions on whether a senior-level SIT could be constituted to carry out the probe.
“
“We will take up the matter after three-four days and look at the aspect of investigation. The SIT had senior members. Please have instructions if an SIT can be formed for investigation… Don’t politicise the case. Courts are not a place for politics. It is a simple case of commission of an offence under penal laws. We are only to ensure proper investigation.”
The Solicitor General assured the Court that instructions would be obtained and placed on record.
Plea Seeks Transparency in Temple Donations and Inventory of Ornaments
Senior AdvocateDevadatt Kamat, appearing for one of the petitioners, submitted that the public interest litigation raises broader issues concerning transparency and accountability in donations received by the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust during the construction of the Ram Temple.
Kamat submitted that the Trust had sought contributions from devotees across the country and had issued receipts for such donations. He urged the Court to ensure that proper records of these monetary contributions are maintained and made available for public scrutiny.
He further raised concerns regarding gold, silver and other valuables donated by devotees, submitting that an inventory of such offerings should also be maintained and disclosed.
“
“When the temple was being built, the Trust sought funds from every devotee from every corner of India and receipts were taken… Ultimately, the money has not reached. There must be a well-maintained accounts book.”
On the issue of ornaments and precious articles, Kamat submitted: “A lot of devotees have given gold, silver and ornaments. The account of that should be disclosed. Somebody has given a gold brick, somebody has given a silver brick… There should be an inventory.”
Responding to the submissions, the Bench observed that records of donations should be properly maintained and accounted for, while noting that practical difficulties could arise if individual claims regarding donations were later made. The Court indicated that it would consider the suggestions while examining the matter further.
Petitioners Seek Preservation of Digital Evidence, Upload of FIR
During the hearing, another petitioner urged the Court to direct the State to preserve all digital evidence, including CCTV footage, DVR recordings and other electronic records connected with the alleged offence, to ensure a fair and transparent investigation.
The petitioner also sought a direction to the State to upload the FIR on the designated online portal, contending that despite the lapse of nearly a month since its registration, the FIR had not been made publicly available in accordance with law.
“
“At least the State should upload the FIR on the designated portal… We are not asking for the case diaries. We are just asking that the status report be supplied so that we can assist this Hon’ble Court.”
Responding to the submissions, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta assured the Bench that all evidence was being preserved. The Court, however, observed that it would first examine the status report before issuing any further directions.
The Bench posted the matter for July 27, indicating that it would consider the pending requests, including those relating to the investigation, preservation of evidence, and uploading of the FIR, after perusing the status report filed by the State.