Sachin Mudgal/Santosh Singh. Ayodhya23 minutes ago
Champat Rai’s authority is still intact in the Ram Mandir complex. Dainik Bhaskar’s investigation has revealed that even after being out of the trust, Champat Rai’s influence still prevails in distributing VIP passes. The temple’s ₹1800 crore fund, which is in bank accounts, is also being managed by his close associates.
This is despite the fact that Champat Rai resigned from the post of General Secretary on 26 June, following allegations of theft of offerings in the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust. His resignation was also accepted on 6 July.
Questions are also being raised about the role of the SIT investigating the case. It is believed that the SIT has given Champat Rai a ‘safe exit’ in its report.
After the trust meeting on 6 July, treasurer Govind Dev Giri was seen smiling as he answered questions.
Why did Champat Rai not leave the Ram Janmabhoomi complex?
Champat Rai has been living in Ayodhya since 1991. From the temple movement to advocating for the Ram Lalla Virajman case in the Supreme Court, he was one of the most active faces. After the court’s decision, when the construction of the grand temple began, he was made the general secretary of the trust.
Champat Rai, who was at the center of Ayodhya’s Ram politics for almost 35 years, resigned from his post after allegations of theft. However, a big question now arising among people is why is he still living in the Ram Janmabhoomi complex?
1. Champat’s ‘two close associates’ in the operation of bank accounts
In the important meeting of the trust held on 6 July, a committee of three people has been formed for the operation of bank accounts. It includes interim General Secretary Krishna Mohan, Engineer Jagdish Afle, and CA Chandan Rai. Out of these, two names directly operate at the behest of Champat Rai. Because they were appointed to assist the trust at the recommendation of Champat Rai himself.
According to the rules, not a single rupee can be withdrawn from the bank without the joint signatures of these three. In such a situation, it is feared that Champat Rai can fully influence the trust’s treasury and financial decisions even without being in office.
2. Champat’s 18 and Gopal’s 14 people are issuing VIP passes
Free VIP passes are issued for Mangal Aarti, Shringar Aarti, and Shayan Aarti at the Ram Temple. For this, special digital IDs are given to the officials responsible for the trust.
The ID of Trustee Dr. Anil Mishra, who resigned on June 26, was deactivated on the same day. The ID of Gopal Nagarkote, who was removed as a special invitee member, was also deactivated on the morning of July 7. However, Champat Rai’s ID was active until July 9, which has now been deactivated.
- Champat’s 18 people are issuing passes: Eighteen volunteers were appointed on Champat Rai’s recommendation. Their IDs are active and they are freely issuing VIP passes. These include Subodh, Mayank Chauhan, Ras Bihari, Rajneesh, Gajanan, and his driver Bablu Tiwari.
- Gopal’s 14 people are also active: Fourteen people were appointed on the recommendation of Gopal Nagarkote, who has been removed from his post. Their IDs are also active. The surprising thing is that the IDs of these 14 people were issued when Champat Rai and Dr. Anil Mishra had clearly refused to sign Gopal’s recommendation.
Claim: ‘Money is being taken for VIP passes’
Whoever issues VIP passes, what’s the problem? We asked this question to journalist Indubhushan Pandey, who has been covering the Ram temple in Ayodhya for a long time. He says there is a racket of VIP pass issuers and hotel owners at the temple, who are earning money even from darshan (worship). VIP passes are free. This is a facility provided for the elderly, women, and children. These passes are issued in six to seven slots a day. One slot, meaning one time period, can issue 300 passes.
However, with these IDs, 2,500-3,000 passes can be issued offline every day. Santosh Dubey, founder of Dharmasena, claims devotees are charged between ₹1,000 and ₹3,000. This includes a share for both the hotel and the pass issuer.
The decision to accept the resignations of Champat Rai and Dr. Anil Mishra was taken at the trustees’ meeting on 6 July.
3. Who gave Tinnu Yadav authority?
In the meeting on 6 July, SIT’s nine-page preliminary investigation report was presented. Looking at this report, questions are arising that the entire blame has been placed on Dr. Anil Mishra. The report states that Dr. Anil Mishra did not properly implement the SOP to prevent the theft of offerings. The SOP, which was formulated between the bank and the trust on September 20, 2024, and February 6, 2025, and bore the signatures of the then SBI Manager Govind Mishra and Dr. Anil Mishra, was never implemented on the ground.
Pages 6 and 7 of the report mention the suspicious role of Ramshankar alias Tinnu Yadav. Without any written order, the keys to the donation boxes remained with Tinnu. He used to move in and out of the counting room without any hindrance. He had a police-style ‘walkie-talkie’. He also had his own VIP pass ID. He used his influence to get his nephew, Manish Yadav, appointed in the counting room, who was caught red-handed stealing on CCTV.
The SIT did write in the report that Tinnu Yadav had all these powers. However, it was nowhere written who gave these powers to Tinnu? Everyone in Ayodhya knows that Tinnu Yadav is none other than Champat Rai’s driver. Champat Rai himself had made him the all-in-all of the temple’s arrangements.
Mahipal Singh, who was an accountant in the trust, had claimed that he had already informed Dr. Anil Mishra, Champat Rai, and Gopal Nagarkote about the theft of offerings. However, upon telling the truth, he was fired from his job. The SIT did not even take his statement.
Engineer Dinanath Verma had accused Dr. Anil Mishra of commission-taking in temple construction materials and 40% of the works. He had complained about this to Champat Rai. After the complaint, he was first assigned to count the offering money. Then, he was threatened and driven out of Ayodhya. The SIT did not deem it necessary to interrogate him either.
