New Delhi: Are the allegations of financial misappropriation at the Ayodhya Ram Mandir a coordinated conspiracy to defame the temple, or is there credible evidence of systemic mismanagement and stolen donation funds? Two starkly conflicting views have emerged from within the ruling saffron dispensation over allegations that donation money was stolen. While a Special Investigation Team (SIT) is actively probing the matter, public remarks by Uttar Pradesh chief minister Adityanath and Nripendra Misra, the construction committee head of the temple, have exposed an undeniable internal fracture, offering deeply contradictory assessments of the crisis that has put both the Union and the state government on the backfoot.The Ram Mandir and the Ram Janmabhoomi movement have been tightly linked to the political growth and identity of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the existing row has caused deep embarrassment to the Narendra Modi-led government as well as to saffron-clad Adityanath.Breaking his silence over the issue on June 19, Adityanath alleged that Ayodhya was being targeted as part of a “conspiracy” and urged commentators to hold their horses until the facts are determined. Conversely, Misra, who is often considered New Delhi’s key man in Ayodhya, has publicly stated that some sort of malpractice occurred and that the temple’s surveillance and vigilance systems failed entirely. The retired bureaucrat, who served as principal secretary to Prime Minister Modi during his first term, heads the construction committee of the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust and is one of its most recognisable faces. His son, Saket Misra, is a BJP MLC who unsuccessfully contested the Lok Sabha election from Shravasti in 2024, months after the temple was inaugurated. After initially distancing himself from the financial allegations by stressing that his sole mandate was to oversee construction work, Misra surprised observers this week with a series of coordinated television interviews. Without mincing words, he admitted to severe lapses in the temple’s management. An analysis of half-a-dozen of his interviews reveals several critical admissions. What Misra has said so farSuspicious movements were caught on camera inside the donation counting room, and stray cash was discovered abandoned in a washroom just outside it. CCTV footage of the donation rooms automatically overwrites after 45 days. Misra noted that while there was “no conscious attempt” to delete evidence, the lack of digital archiving or backups means the SIT will face significant hurdles verifying activities prior to that window. The established protocol for counting cash and vigilance was completely bypassed and the counting room staff apparently did not follow the dress code of wearing attires without pockets. The informal practice of appointing temple staff based solely on their connections to the RSS or swayamsevaks is not working. Misra argued that this must give way to a formalised procedure of appointments with character checks and vigilance even following the end of work. The Trust urgently needs a CEO, preferably an experienced retired official, with independent management powers, argued Misra. Speaking to ABP News, Misra characterised the lapse as a “khula daka” (open robbery), expressing shock that neither the Trust nor the State Bank of India received regular reports. “It’s a robbery,” Misra stated.He added that the bank failed to fulfil its contractual responsibilities. According to Misra, the agreement explicitly mandated that the bank would be fully responsible for the counting process and was required to deploy its regular permanent staff for vigilance work, something that did not happen.Misra concluded that the siphoning of money and poor vigilance pointed to a “severe lack of experience in administrative management.” He told Bharatvarsh TV9 and NDTV that the surveillance system across the entire temple premises was either “non-existent or poor,” describing overall vigilance as “zero.” Analysts reviewing the available CCTV footage, he noted, saw clear indications of a specific individual personally handling the inflow and outflow of funds and keeping bundles of cash with themselves. “I don’t think CCTVs have been properly used. CCTV surveillance was not effective,” he said.Adityanath’s Ayodhya visitAmid the tension, Adityanath made a high-profile visit to Ayodhya on June 19, an effort widely seen as an attempt to control damage, counter alleged dropping footfall, and calm public panic.Speaking at a government event, Adityanath, who had so far remained silent on the issue, appealed to devotees of Ram to remain patient and wait for the SIT’s findings. He promised that the investigation would separate truth from falsehood – “doodh ka doodh, paani ka paani“. He urged anyone with documentary proof to hand it over to investigators.“The SIT probe will definitely separate the truth from falsehood. There is no doubt about that,” Adityanath said. However, he sharply warned against “irresponsible comments” that could hurt religious sentiments of devotees of Ram.“We have waited 500 years to reclaim the site of Lord Ram. We have waged this struggle for five centuries while remaining within the bounds of propriety. Just wait another 15 days. Be patient. Do not worry. However, we should not, under any circumstances, be misled by those who seek to defame Ayodhya or insult the Ram Janmabhoomi temple,” said Adityanath.Later, speaking at an event marking the 88th birth anniversary of Mahant Nritya Gopal Das, president of the Temple Trust, Adityanath adopted a far more aggressive tone. He framed the allegations as part of a historical, systematic plot to tarnish India’s image whenever the country achieves something significant. “Whenever India has moved in a positive direction, be it in any era, conspirators have lost their sleep and immediately set about hatching plots in response. That very same conspiracy is underway once again in a systematic manner aimed at maligning Ayodhya Dham, casting aspersions on the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi, and vilifying the entire tradition,” Adityanath said.He appealed Hindu community to maintain its faith and trust in the government and tried to discredit the Opposition. Notably, the general secretary of the Trust and senior VHP leader Champat Rai was absent from the anniversary event, a move observers interpreted as Adityanath creating political distance from figures at the center of the storm. Rai has faced intense criticism from various quarters, including prominent Hindu seers, especially after issuing a defensive, partial clarification following initial allegations made by Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav on X earlier this month. Part of the Ram Janmabhoomi movement, Rai was an accused in the Babri Masjid demolition conspiracy but was eventually acquitted like all other RSS and BJP leaders.Despite the public distancing, Misra defended Rai’s personal integrity during an interview with NDTV, calling him “spotless”. Misra pointed out that Rai has been dedicated to the Ram Mandir movement for four decades, lives a simple life without a bank account or family, and has no personal financial stake. Misra described Adityanath’s decision to distance himself publicly from Rai during the visit as an example of Adityanath’s “ucchatam vivek” (highest discretion), noting that since Rai and other members are under the scanner and likely to be questioned by the probe team, appearing publicly with the CM would damage the SIT’s credibility in the public eye. No member of the Trust has publicly spoken out yet other than the initial short video message by Rai, in which he had said that a routine audit was ongoing but nothing “noteworthy” had come up. Rai has also not issued any public statement over insinuations and allegations made against him over the past two weeks. Misra, while maintaining distance from the official probe, however, answered some commonly asked questions: Why was there no FIR yet in the matter?Misra said that the prevailing line of thought was that until concrete facts emerged, the matter would be treated as an incident involving an unknown event and an unknown person. The FIR would be lodged on the basis of what happened, how it happened and who is responsible, he said. Misra also refused to believe the government’s claims that 16 crore persons visited the temple over the past year. He feels the number was exaggerated and said that the media should be informed about the true figure.How much money was siphoned off?The opposition has, albeit without providing evidence, alleged that crores of rupees has been stolen. Misra said this question needed a “serious probe” and would be only determined by finding out since when the malpractice has been going on. He explained that after going through receipts of the last two to three years unofficially, the monthly donation received was a maximum of Rs 10-12 crore. The minimum donation per month was Rs 4 crore. On average, the temple received Rs 75-80 crore per year, he said. Around 40-45 persons work in the counting process. The matter came to light when some cash was found in a washroom near one of the counting rooms. Champat Rai was informed and reached within 30 minutes, said Misra. “He then consulted his colleagues and thought it appropriate to request the state government to set up a SI,.” Misra said, speculating that it might be possible that someone abandoned the cash as there was no safe way to smuggle it out of the secure zone. He reiterated that being an RSS Swayamsevak (volunteer) should no longer be the sole criterion for hiring counting-room staff. Further complicating the issue are allegations against Rai’s close associate and veteran RSS and VHP worker, Ram Prasad Yadav alias Tinnu. Yadav is accused of amassing disproportionate assets worth Rs 50 crore in Ayodhya. Following the 2019 Supreme Court verdict, Yadav was assigned responsibilities related to service and administrative work connected with the temple project. Local reports allege Yadav helped secure counting-room jobs for the individuals now under suspicion. Yadav has released a video vehemently denying the claims, asserting his wealth was lawfully earned through running auto-rickshaws, organisational honorariums, and registered land deals dating back to 2008, well before the temple verdict. He termed the allegations and rumours against him as “baseless” to malign him. He said he had lawfully earned all the money and purchased land in Ayodhya and built a house much before the 2019 Ram Janmabhoomi verdict. Yadav said he had purchased the said land in 2008 through a registered sale deed and that a building was constructed on it between 2015 and 2016. He claimed he rented out his constructed property to engineering firms working on the temple, which accounts for his income. Confronted with the allegations against Yadav, Misra chose not to give him a clean chit, confirming that Yadav is on the list of “trustworthy people” who will be thoroughly questioned by the SIT to determine if that trust was breached. If and how Yadav “misused” that trust, is hard to say at this stage, Misra said, acknowledging that the former got some “big” and “sensitive responsibilities” when the trust was formed.Meanwhile, reacting to Adityanath’s Ayodhya visit, Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav criticised the move on X, warning against attempts to influence the SIT. Yadav claimed the SIT was already under a cloud of suspicion due to its controversial composition.“The public is demanding a true accounting, not just of the milk and water, but of the gold and silver,” Yadav wrote. “An account must be rendered not only for the cash offerings and priceless stone slabs but also for the precious metals and jewelry.” He concluded by questioning why the chief minister’s speech “contained more threats than substantive statements.”The SIT, formed on June 13, has 15 days to submit a final report on the allegations.Omar Rashid is an independent journalist.