Supreme Court Notes 105 Instances of Unauthorised Currency Removal in Ram Temple Donations Case; Chargesheet Expected by September 25

A Bench of the Supreme Court of India led by Chief Justice Surya Kant on Monday, September 21, 2026, noted that a status report submitted by the Uttar Pradesh government's Special Investigation Team had identified 105 instances of unauthorised currency removal captured on CCTV footage in the Ram Temple donations misappropriation case. The Solicitor General, appearing for the Uttar Pradesh government, informed the court that the investigation had been substantially concluded and that a chargesheet would be filed before the jurisdictional Additional Sessions Judge on or before September 25, 2026.

The status report detailed the role of every person allegedly involved in the unauthorised removal. The identification of 105 separate instances captured on CCTV demonstrates the systematic nature of the alleged misappropriation, suggesting a pattern of conduct spanning multiple occasions rather than isolated incidents.

Investigation Substantially Concluded

The Solicitor General's statement that the probe had been substantially concluded signals that the investigative phase is nearing completion. In criminal investigations of this scale and complexity, particularly those involving financial crimes at religious institutions, the transition from investigation to chargesheet filing represents a critical juncture. The filing of the chargesheet will formally mark the end of the investigative phase and the beginning of the judicial process, where the accused will be required to answer the charges in court.

The September 25, 2026 deadline gives the investigation team a defined timeframe within which to complete all outstanding work, consolidate findings, and prepare the chargesheet for presentation to the Additional Sessions Judge. This deadline demonstrates the court's role in maintaining momentum in the case and ensuring that investigations do not become indefinitely prolonged.

CCTV Evidence and Role Assessment

The reliance on CCTV footage as the primary evidence for identifying the 105 instances of unauthorised currency removal reflects the importance of technological surveillance in modern criminal investigations. Each instance captured on CCTV would typically be reviewed to determine the date, time, location within the temple premises, the person or persons involved, and the amount of currency removed. This granular documentation becomes crucial during the trial phase, where the prosecution must establish beyond reasonable doubt that each removal was unauthorised and that it was committed by the accused.

The assessment of the role of every person allegedly involved indicates that the investigation has moved beyond simply identifying that currency was removed and has focused on attributing responsibility to specific individuals. Different persons may have played different roles—some may have been directly involved in removing currency, while others may have facilitated access, disabled security measures, or provided information that enabled the misappropriation.

Implications for the Accused

For the individuals against whom the investigation has identified involvement, the filing of the chargesheet will mark the formal commencement of criminal proceedings. Once the chargesheet is filed, the Additional Sessions Judge will examine whether sufficient grounds exist to proceed with the trial. The accused will be entitled to bail hearings and will have the opportunity to challenge the charges and the evidence presented against them.

The identification of 105 instances provides the prosecution with substantial documentary evidence in the form of CCTV footage. The strength of the prosecution's case will ultimately depend on the quality of this footage, the clarity of identification of the persons involved, the chain of custody of the evidence, and the testimony of witnesses who can corroborate what the CCTV footage shows. The defence will have the opportunity to challenge the admissibility and reliability of this evidence during the trial.

Religious Institution and Public Trust

The misappropriation of donations at a major religious institution like the Ram Temple is not merely a financial crime; it represents a breach of public trust. Devotees make donations to temples with the expectation that the funds will be used for the maintenance of the temple, charitable activities, and religious purposes. When currency is unauthorised removed, it violates this trust and raises questions about the adequacy of internal controls and oversight mechanisms at the institution.

The Supreme Court of India's involvement in monitoring the progress of this investigation reflects the seriousness with which the judiciary views crimes affecting religious institutions and the funds entrusted to them. The court's direction that a chargesheet be filed by a specific date ensures that the case does not languish in the investigative phase and that the judicial process moves forward expeditiously.

Status Report and Judicial Oversight

The practice of requiring investigating agencies to file status reports before the Supreme Court of India provides the court with visibility into the progress of investigations and allows it to exercise oversight. In this case, the status report provided detailed information about the number of instances identified, the assessment of roles, and the timeline for filing the chargesheet. This transparency helps ensure that investigations are conducted diligently and that the investigating agency remains accountable to the court.

The Bench's review of the 105 instances identified in the status report creates a record of the court's consideration of the matter and demonstrates that the court has examined the investigative findings. This record will be part of the case file and may be referred to during subsequent proceedings, including the trial and any appeals.