The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused an urgent hearing on a plea seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)-led Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe into the alleged theft of funds collected for the construction of the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya. The petition was filed by advocates Ajay Kumar Rai and Dinesh Kumar Yadav.
Plea Details
The petitioners alleged that a significant amount of money donated by devotees for the temple construction was misappropriated. They sought directions for the constitution of an SIT headed by the CBI to investigate the matter. The plea claimed that the alleged fund theft had shaken public faith in the temple project.
Court's Response
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice P.S. Narasimha declined to grant an urgent hearing, stating that the matter did not require immediate intervention. The court suggested that the petitioners approach the appropriate forum for relief. The CJI remarked, “We are not inclined to grant urgent listing. You may file a regular hearing application.”
Background of the Case
The Ram Mandir construction in Ayodhya has been a landmark project following the Supreme Court's 2019 verdict that cleared the way for the temple. The Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust oversees the construction and fund management. However, allegations of financial irregularities have surfaced, prompting legal action.
The petitioners argued that the alleged theft involved crores of rupees and that a thorough probe was necessary to ensure accountability. According to the plea, “The misappropriation of funds has caused grave concern among devotees and the general public. An independent investigation is imperative to restore trust.”
Legal Precedents
The Supreme Court has in the past ordered CBI or SIT probes in cases involving public trust and large-scale financial misconduct. However, the court’s discretion in granting urgent hearings is limited to matters of exceptional gravity. The present petition did not meet that threshold, the bench indicated.
The petitioners have not yet indicated their next course of action. They may file a regular hearing petition or approach a lower court for relief. The temple trust has denied any wrongdoing, stating that all funds are accounted for and audited regularly.
Impact and Reactions
The refusal of urgent hearing has disappointed the petitioners, who expressed concern that delays could hamper the investigation. “We will continue to pursue the matter through proper legal channels,” said advocate Ajay Kumar Rai. Meanwhile, the temple trust maintained that the allegations were baseless and aimed at tarnishing the project’s image.
The case highlights the ongoing scrutiny of large-scale religious fund drives in India. With the Ram Mandir being a high-profile project, any financial impropriety could have significant political and social repercussions.
