Ram Mandir donation theft probe: Supreme Court ends monitoring after police files chargesheet

A batch of petitions before the Court were seeking a CBI probe in the donation theft case.
Ram Mandir, Ayodhya
Ram Mandir, Ayodhya
Published on: 
2 min read
Listen to this article

The Supreme Court on Monday closed a batch of petitions related to the Ayodhya Ram Mandir fund embezzlement case after it was informed that the police has filed a chargesheet in the case.

A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana said the petitioners, who had approached the top court to seek an independent probe into the case, can assist the trial court where the matter is now pending.

"It is not a simple case of an accused versus the State. It is a case where some element of public interest is also involved. Therefore, we will grant you, like the law now permits the victims of crime, to assist the Court," the Court said.

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana

The Court directed the trial court to proceed in accordance with law.

"Since there is an element of public interest involved, the petitioner is granted liberty to assist the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate on the same premise as the law enables a victim of crime to assist the Court," it added.

A batch of petitions before the Court were filed seeking a CBI probe in the donation theft case.

However, the Court allowed an SIT of police officers, with the addition of a forensic auditor, to continue investigating the matter. The SIT found 105 instances of unauthorised currency removal and suspicious deposits linked to eight accused.

Today, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the Court that the accused would invest the money or deposit it in bank accounts.

"We went back in time to see how much money was deposited. Some of them have invested in property. For example, the sale deed shows that a property was purchased for ₹15 lakh. But the property is worth ₹50 lakh. So the balance was obviously paid in cash, and the cash must have been generated through this because he has no other source of income," Mehta said.

[Read Live Coverage]

Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news
www.barandbench.com