Congress Presses Modi on Ram Temple Donation Theft as PM Visits Uttar Pradesh

The Congress used Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit to Uttar Pradesh on Sunday to step up its campaign over the theft of donations at the Shri Ram Temple in Ayodhya. Party general secretary Jairam Ramesh accused the Centre and the state government of trying to contain the case instead of ordering a full, independent investigation.

In a series of posts on X under the slogan "Chanda Chori, Aastha Dhokha" (donation theft, betrayal of faith), Ramesh asked Modi to speak on the matter during his visit. He also warned that the party would keep pressing the issue if the Prime Minister stayed silent. The posts came as Modi reached Varanasi for the Indian Air Force's aerial display at Namo Ghat.

The numbers behind the Congress attack

Ramesh built his case on a gap between how many people are reported to visit Ayodhya and how much money the temple trust has recorded in offerings. He cited figures attributed to the RSS and the trust: Rs 3,264 crore raised in 2021 through the Nidhi Samarpan donation drive and corpus contributions. He also cited footfall estimates of about 13.55 crore visitors in the first nine months of 2024 and roughly 10 crore more during the 2025 Maha Kumbh.

His sharpest claim covers the period from April 1, 2025, to February 28, 2026. He said about 16 crore devotees visited in that time, yet recorded offerings came to only Rs 82.78 crore. That works out to about Rs 5 per visitor, a figure he called highly suspicious.

He also cited Nripendra Misra, chairman of the temple construction committee, who he said had described the episode as daylight robbery rather than ordinary theft.

What the investigation has found so far

The Congress figures differ sharply from what investigators have put on record. A Special Investigation Team has filed a chargesheet against eight accused in a local court. It relies on CCTV footage, mobile phone chats and call detail records. According to the chargesheet, one accused, Avinash Shukla, removed cash on 85 separate occasions during the counting of donations. Others are accused of removing money themselves or helping on dozens of occasions.

Ramesh wants to know why the SIT put the loss at about Rs 80 lakh. He asked four questions:

• How many people across the country donated, and how much in total?
• How much was collected through donation boxes and counters?
• What is the real value of the stolen money?
• Where is the accounting for offerings from close to 30 crore visitors?

He also questioned how the trustees were chosen. He said Modi personally picked people linked to the BJP, the Vishva Hindu Parishad and the RSS, with no public consultation.

Why the issue is gaining political weight

This is not a new line of attack. Over the past several weeks the Congress has accused the Prime Minister of tacitly shielding those involved. It has questioned the role of former trust general secretary Champat Rai and asked why it took 21 days to register an FIR after a video of the alleged theft reached Rai on June 4. The party has repeatedly called for a probe under Supreme Court supervision.

The timing matters. Uttar Pradesh votes in assembly elections early next year, and INDIA bloc partners have already begun seat-sharing talks for that contest. The Ram Temple has been central to the BJP's political identity in the state. A controversy over how its offerings were handled gives the opposition a rare chance to challenge the ruling party on ground the BJP usually controls.

The BJP and the temple trust had not publicly responded to Sunday's specific questions at the time of writing. The per-visitor calculation rests on footfall estimates, not verified headcounts, and visitor numbers in pilgrimage towns are often overstated. The figure therefore shows the size of the gap the Congress is pointing to, but it does not by itself prove how much money is missing. Whether the case grows beyond the SIT's Rs 80 lakh figure will likely depend on the court and on any audit of the trust's accounts.

This is an original summary based on public reporting. See our editorial policy for how we source, write, and correct our stories.