3 min readNew DelhiUpdated: Jun 29, 2026 02:02 PM IST
The Supreme Court Monday refused to grant an urgent hearing to a batch of Public Interest Litigations (PILs) seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the alleged financial irregularities and embezzlement of public donations at the Ayodhya Ram Temple.
The matter was mentioned for emergency listing before a vacation bench comprising Justices M M Sundresh and Sheel Nagu. Dismissing the request for an expedited out-of-turn hearing, the bench noted that the petitions would be listed in due course once the Supreme Court resumes full regular functioning.
Seeking an urgent hearing, one of the petitioners told the bench, “The matter is very serious.” Justice Sundresh asked him what the urgency is.
The counsel appearing for the petitioner said, “The urgency is the way the state is dealing with the matter casts doubts…”
The bench, however, said it will be listed in the first week after the court reopens. “Heavens are not going to fall.”
The Supreme Court is currently operating on reduced strength during its partial working days and is scheduled to return to full operational capacity on July 13.
The petition, filed by two advocates, names the Shri Ram Janmbhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust, the state of Uttar Pradesh, and the Union of India as respondents. According to the petition, there are allegations of dishonest misappropriation, diversion, and embezzlement of public donations intended for the construction of the Ram Temple.
Story continues below this ad
A special investigation team (SIT) established by the Uttar Pradesh government is currently investigating the allegations. However, the petition claims that the SIT lacks the necessary forensic and investigative resources for a complex financial probe and that it began its inquiry without registering an FIR.
Apprehension of evidence tampering
One of the petitioners told the bench that the Supreme Court’s listing department informed him that the matter would be heard after the partial working days. He added that his apprehension is that electronic evidence, such as CCTV and DVRs, might be tampered with or corrupted.
But the bench told him, “You heard us earlier. We follow the same procedure.”
One of the petitions cited media reports of the controversy and said, “The allegations, as disclosed in these reports and other publicly available materials, prima facie disclose serious instances of dishonest misappropriation, diversion, embezzlement and breach of trust in relation to public donations and funds entrusted for religious and charitable purposes.”
Story continues below this ad
It said, “The nature and gravity of the allegations warrant the immediate registration of a Regular Case/ FIR and a fair, independent and time-bound investigation in accordance with law, so as to secure relevant documentary and electronic evidence, trace the flow of funds, identify the persons responsible, and prevent any tampering, destruction, concealment or manipulation of material evidence by the suspect(s), if any.”
The plea added, “Opaque funds/ assets handling by an institution serving in a fiduciary capacity directly impacts faith, sentiments, and confidence of countless devotees and members of the public who have voluntarily donated funds for construction of Bhagwan Shri Ram Temple at Janmbhoomi.”