New Delhi: While addressing the Satta Parivartan Jan Aakrosh rally at Gosainganj in Uttar Pradesh’s Ayodhya district on October 27, Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader and Rajya Sabha Member of Parliament Sanjay Singh referred to 304 instances of theft caught on CCTV footage in connection with the Ram Mandir donations theft case. On October 15, an investigation published on The Wire had first revealed that these 304 instances of theft were caught on CCTV.The Wire had also revealed that this footage was part of the evidence submitted before the Anti-corruption court in Ayodhya as part of the investigation into the theft allegations. The accused in the case were Avinash Shukla, Karunesh Pandey, Manish Kumar Yadav, Ramashankar Mishra, Lavkush Mishra and Anukalp Mishra. The Wire had reported on the 59-page chargesheet summary which included the list of witnesses and the statements of some staffers employed by the Ram Mandir Trust.The instances of theft, as mentioned in the chargesheet, were of two kinds – those in which the accused appeared to keep the money and another kind in which the accused seemed to participate in the act of theft, while not keeping the stolen items with themselves.“Commission to the tune of 40% has been charged while awarding construction contracts, land worth Rs 2 crore was bought for Rs 18.5 crore within five minutes, the paduka (footwear) of Lord Ram were stolen along with a necklace even a Ramcharitmanas book made of gold wasn’t spared. Theft was reported in the chadhawa (donations) as well, and as the chargesheet has revealed that 304 instances of chori (theft) were caught [on camera]. 304 times, yet no action has been taken either against Champat Rai, Gopal Rao and Anil Mishra or those associated with the BJP. Only smaller fishes were put behind the bars and the entire incident was whitewashed, so now I want to tell Modi and Yogi that those who steal money from the temple won’t be allowed to enter inside the village,” Singh said at the rally.“When an announcement was made that a grand temple would be constructed, people gave donations with a lot of reverence. There were women who donated their jewellery, farmers sold their agricultural produce in order to donate money. A grand temple was indeed built but those belonging to the BJP resorted to looting the temple,” said Singh, who is the third complainant who submitted a letter at Ayodhya’s Ram Janmabhoomi police station in June, demanding action against the culprits.Earlier, while speaking to reporters in Ayodhya and referring to the theft, Singh had said, “This case has revealed the character of BJP. They [referring to BJP] are neither loyal towards the public nor towards Lord Ram.”As reported by The Wire, while the list of 133 witnesses has mentioned the name of former general secretary of the trust, Champat Rai at serial number 18, another trustee Anil Mishra’s name also appears at serial number 17. Both Rai and Mishra resigned in June, as outrage over the allegations of donation theft at the temple grew.Taking to X, Samajwadi Party MP from UP’s Kaushambi district, Pushpendra Saroj, also commented on 304 instances of theft. He wrote: “It has been alleged that 304 instances of theft were caught on CCTV footage at Ayodhya’s Ram Mandir. The question is why no action against Champat Rai despite such serious allegations? Those who do politics in the name of Ram, why are they silent on this?”On Thursday (October 29), Congress leader and party’s general secretary in charge communications, Jairam Ramesh also took to X and wrote a post titled ‘Chanda Chori, Aastha Dhokha’ (Fooling people in the name of faith, while stealing temple donations’. “We have been stating from day one that the BJP government wants to protect the real big thieves. The accused appeared via video conferencing but the demand to provide video footage and audio remains pending.”Speaking to The Wire, defence lawyer Kulshekhar Singh confirmed that not all annexures related to the 74,000-page chargesheet submitted by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) has been handed over to him for perusal. The next date for the hearing in this case is scheduled to take place on November 4.