On November 13, 1958 when Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru was informed by one Mangaldas Pakvasa about the grave issue of stealing of gold, silver and massive amount of cash from the 18th century Shrinathji temple of Nathdwara in Rajasthan by its custodian, one Maharaja, he swiftly responded by calling the heist as robbery.He did so in a letter addressed to the then Chief Minister of the State Mohanlal Sukhadia and Union home minister G.B. Pant to take strict measures to remedy the problem.In that letter, Nehru charged that Maharaj’s action in secretly taking away those valuables, constituted misappropriation of public funds and observed that he got away with that act of embezzlement because of slackness adopted in handling that serious matter and sadly noted that the Maharaj took objection to the enquiry committee, consisting of chief justice K.N. Wanchoo, appointed by Rajasthan government and so the committee never functioned. “To allow this kind of thing to happen,” Nehru remarked, “brings no credit to our governments.”He described the whole arrangement of the functioning of Nathdwara temple as completely defective and wondered, “How any man of religion can tolerate such arrangements.” Nehru proceeded to observe, “The Mahant or Maharaj ….is apparently a person as far removed from religion or spirituality or decent honest living and behaviour as anything can be.”Also read: Ram Mandir Theft: ‘Modi Should Apologise as Instead of Seers, He Appointed Champat Rai,’ Says CongressHe then sharply remarked, “It is improper for public sentiment to be exploited for the greed and cupidity of individuals….” Asking the question, “To what good purpose is the income from Nathdwara temple being utilised?” Nehru answered, “Chiefly, I imagine, for political purposes. This cannot be allowed to continue and you must take urgent steps to put matters right.” Adding further and with all seriousness, he forcefully stated, “Apart from this, the immediate question arises why a man who has been charged with something equivalent to robbery as well as misappropriation of funds should not be proceeded against and in fact should be allowed to continue where he can misappropriate more funds. I think urgent action is required and it is not right that the Rajasthan Government should take a lenient view of this and put the blame for delay on other persons.”Modi’s silence on dacoity in Ram TempleNehru’s sharp response in 1958 with respect to the embezzlement of jewellery and valuables from Srinathji temple in Nathdwara exposes Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s deafening silence in the wake of reports alleging massive theft of huge amount of cash, gold, silver and other precious stones, donated by devotees to Ram temple in Ayodhya. Modi himself consecrated that temple in February 2024 and on that occasion he, in utter violation of the constitutionally guaranteed neutrality of Indian State to religion, said, “Ram is Rashtra (Ram is State) and Dev is Desh (Deity is country).” Employing his own logic, he should have understood that the egregious commission of theft of valuables, gold and silver donated by devotees because of their unshakable faith in Lord Ram is a grave crime on Indian state and our country. Apart from theft of huge amounts of cash, gold and silver, there are serious allegations against some of the trustees appointed by Modi for amassing crores of rupees while acquiring land for construction of Ram Temple in Ayodhya and allegedly taking 40% commission from those who got the work orders to construct that temple.Nripendra Mishra, former principal secretary to Prime Minister Modi and a trustee of Ram Janam Bhoomi Teerth Khetra Trust, famously stated that what happened in Ram temple in Ayodhya is not just theft but dacoity. In spite of such a gross deviation manifested in dacoity Prime Minister Modi never uttered a single word to express his anger and anguish and find remedy to the heist in Ayodhya Ram Temple. In 1958, as stated above, Nehru, apart from flagging the robbery committed in Srinathji temple by Maharaja, referred to the use of that temple’s income for political purposes and not in pursuit of religious or spiritual objectives.Also read: Hanumangarhi Head Priest Says ‘There Has Certainly Been Theft’ at Ram Temple, Backs UP’s SITConstruction of Ram Temple in the place where Babri Mosque once stood was the political project of BJP, the leaders of which used it to mobilise people around it and appeal for votes which enabled it to capture power. The demolition of Babri Mosque was described by the Supreme Court “as egregious violation of rule of law” and such a violation could be made possible because of mass mobilisation by top BJP and Hindutva leaders around Ram temple issue. So, the alleged unprecedented embezzlement and corruption associated with Ram Temple at Ayodhya yet again underscores egregious violation of law, jurisprudence, morality and ethics primarily to serve political purposes and for, in the words of Nehru, “for greed and cupidity of individuals…”.Greed and cupidity enthroned in the name of RamIn fact “greed and cupidity” has been enthroned in the name of Lord of Ram in the Ayodhya temple and it is evidenced from the resignation of only two trustees Champat Rai and Arun Mishra without any penal action against them and other trustees. Only some eight minor players have been arrested and proceeded against.The affairs of Ayodhya Ram temple is not being governed either by a law enacted by the Uttar Pradesh legislature nor the parliament. Only Prime Minister Modi announced the formation of the trust consisting of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) members following the mandate of the Supreme Court judgement which allowed construction of the temple even as it observed that demolition of Babri Mosque was “egregious violation of rule of law”. That trust is beyond the purview of RTI. Even after the nationwide outrage over the alleged embezzlement of funds and grafts, described as dacoity, Prime Minister Modi has not said a word on it.Nathdwara Temple Act, 1959In contrast, when Nehru asked Sukhadia to firmly deal with robbery of valuables donated by devotees of Srinathji temple in Nathdwara, a law, Nathdwara Temple Act, 1959, was enacted by the Rajasthan government to deal with, among others, donations of devotees. It was challenged by Maharaja claiming that the temple was his private property falling within his fundamental right to pursue religion, and so all donations from devotees are religious in character precluding the intervention of the State. Both the Rajasthan high court and Supreme Court upheld the Act.Also read: SIT Not Enough, CBI Probe Needed to Unearth Ram Mandir ‘Corruption’, Says Head of Achari TempleOn January 21, 1963, the Supreme Court in its landmark judgement in Tilkayat Shri Govindlalji Maharaj vs The State Of Rajasthan rejected those arguments on the ground that “…the right to manage the properties of the temple is a purely secular matter and it cannot, …be regarded as a religious practice so as to fall under Art. 25(1) or as amounting to affairs in matters of religion.” It also observed in its operative part that those assigned “…with the religious worship in the temple handle jewellery and ornaments of a very valuable order which are put on the idol and removed from the idol every day, and the safety of the said valuable jewellery is a secular matter within the jurisdiction of the Board.”If the ratio of the 1963 judgement is applied to the Ayodhya Ram Mandir theft case then the safety of the valuable jewellery constituting a secular matter and falling within the jurisdiction of the board has been breached.So Modi’s silence on the demolition of trust of countless devotees who donated to Ayodhya Ram temple implies his guilt.S.N. Sahu served as Officer on Special Duty as President of India K.R. Narayanan.