# Supreme Court presses Uttar Pradesh government over Ram Mandir donation theft probe, suggests forming a fresh SIT

> Hearing the case related to alleged irregularities in Ram Mandir donations, the Supreme Court questioned the Uttar Pradesh government over the current SIT's limited role and suggested forming a fresh SIT to investigate the entire matter.

**Type:** article · **Category:** Uttar Pradesh · **Published:** 2026-07-20 · **Source:** TrendKia
**Canonical:** https://trendkia.com/en/uttar-pradesh/ayodhya-dana-chori-jancha-ko-lekara-supreme-court-ka-up-sarakara-se-savala-svatntra-jancha-tima-banane-ka-sujhava-9052 · **Language:** English
**Tags:** Ram Mandir donation, Supreme Court, SIT, Uttar Pradesh government, Ayodhya, donation theft, Solicitor General, CJI

The Supreme Court questioned Uttar Pradesh's existing investigation setup while hearing a case involving alleged irregularities in donations made to the Ram Mandir. The court observed that if the SIT constituted so far had only carried out a preliminary inquiry, a fresh and independent SIT could now be formed to investigate the entire matter.

## What the Solicitor General told the court
During the hearing, the Solicitor General clarified that the mandate of the earlier SIT was limited to determining whether a cognizable offence was made out in the case. That team's report concluded that the facts did constitute an offence warranting registration of a case, following which an FIR has already been filed. He added that the existing SIT was not itself conducting the investigation, its role having been confined to this preliminary assessment, and that no separate team had yet been set up to carry the probe forward.

## Court suggests forming a new SIT
When the Supreme Court asked whether a separate SIT had actually been set up to investigate the case, it was told that no such team existed yet. The bench then suggested that a new SIT be constituted to carry out a thorough investigation into the entire matter, so that the alleged irregularities in the donations could be traced to their root. The Supreme Court said it would take up the case again next Monday to consider the way forward.

## Same senior IPS officer could lead the new team
The court noted that the earlier SIT comprised the Commissioner of Lucknow, a special secretary from the finance department, and a senior IPS officer based in Lucknow. The Supreme Court suggested that the new SIT also be led by the same senior IPS officer, so that responsibility rests with an officer already familiar with the case and the entire investigation can proceed under one experienced officer's supervision.

## Court warns against politicising the issue
During the hearing, the Chief Justice of India (CJI) said the court was proceeding with great caution in this matter. He said the issue should not be politicised, adding that the court's only concern was that the investigation be carried out properly and reach a solid, logical conclusion so that the truth comes out.

## Solicitor General to seek instructions from the UP government
The Supreme Court asked the Solicitor General to take instructions from the Uttar Pradesh government on this suggestion and update the court accordingly. However, the Supreme Court has not yet issued any final order or binding direction in the matter, and the way forward is expected to be decided only at the next hearing.

## What this means for you
- **Across India:** Since the case concerns oversight and accountability of donations at a major religious trust like the Ram Mandir, the Supreme Court's stand could set a precedent for transparency at temples and trusts nationwide.
- **In Uttar Pradesh:** If a new SIT is formed, the Uttar Pradesh government will have to conduct a fresh, deeper investigation into the Ayodhya donation theft case, increasing pressure on the state administration to be accountable.

## Questions & Answers

### 1. What did the Supreme Court question in this case?
The court asked why, if the SIT formed so far had only conducted a preliminary inquiry, no separate SIT had been set up to investigate the entire matter.

### 2. What was the earlier SIT's mandate?
According to the Solicitor General, the earlier SIT was only checking whether a cognizable offence was made out in the case, and an FIR has already been filed based on its report.

### 3. Who could lead the new SIT?
The Supreme Court suggested that the same senior IPS officer who was part of the earlier SIT in Lucknow be put in charge of the new SIT.

### 4. When will the case be heard next?
The Supreme Court will hear the case again next Monday.

### 5. Has the court issued any final order?
No, the Supreme Court has only made a suggestion so far and asked the Solicitor General to take instructions from the Uttar Pradesh government; no final order has been issued.

### 6. Who was part of the earlier SIT?
It included the Commissioner of Lucknow, a special secretary from the finance department, and a senior IPS officer based in Lucknow.

---
_TrendKia — Har trend, sabse pehle.. Machine-readable view; canonical HTML at the URL above._