Ram Temple theft case: Tinnu held keys to donation boxes without approval, reveals SIT

Ram Temple in Ayodhya (file photo)

LUCKNOW: The SIT has zeroed in on the role of Ramashankar Yadav alias Tinnu, with investigators pointing to serious procedural irregularities that allegedly allowed him to wield considerable control over the temple’s donation collection system despite lacking any formal authorisation.According to the SIT report, Tinnu retained custody of the keys to hundis (donation boxes) installed at various locations in the Ram temple complex while functioning as a representative of the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust.However, investigators found that no written order, official notification or formal authorisation was issued empowering him to discharge such a sensitive responsibility.The SIT has termed the arrangement a major administrative lapse, observing that entrusting an individual with exclusive custody of donation box keys without any documented delegation of authority, defined accountability or institutional oversight was inappropriate for a system handling crore of rupees in public donations.The report states that such a crucial responsibility should have been governed by formal orders, periodic audits and clearly fixed accountability.Investigators have further alleged that Tinnu exploited his position to facilitate the induction of his relative, Manish Kumar Yadav, into the temple’s highly sensitive donation-counting team.According to the SIT, Tinnu recommended Manish for counting duty, thereby giving him direct access to the cash counting process.

The report states that this recommendation created an opportunity for Manish to participate in the misappropriation of donation money.Besides scrutinising Tinnu’s role, the investigation has highlighted multiple security lapses in the counting process, including inadequate supervision of CCTV cameras, failure to preserve surveillance footage beyond 45 days despite audit recommendations to retain it for 180 days, and non-compliance with mandatory bank protocols governing the deployment and supervision of counting personnel.During SIT’s first visit to Ayodhya on June 15, Tinnu was the first accused to publicly respond to the allegations. Addressing reporters and posting on social media, he dismissed claims that he owned assets worth Rs 50 crore as “baseless” and “misleading”. Tinnu said his land was purchased through a registered sale deed in 2008, well before the Ram temple project, and that the building was later rented to personnel of L&T and other firms working on the temple project, describing the rental income as his legitimate source of earnings.Based on the evidence collected so far, the SIT has concluded that there is a prima facie case against Avinash Shukla, Tinnu Yadav, Anukalp Mishra, Lavkush Mishra, Manish Kumar Yadav, Karunesh Pandey and Ramashankar Mishra, who allegedly committed theft, criminal misappropriation and criminal breach of trust while handling temple donations inside the counting room.