Ram Temple donation probe: Akhilesh Yadav claims SIT choice reflects BJP internal rift
Synopsis
Akhilesh Yadav's sharpest claim isn't about the theft itself — it's about who controls the investigation. By alleging that the SIT was chosen over the CBI to keep the probe within the Lucknow faction's grip, the SP chief has turned a religious controversy into a window into BJP's internal fault lines.
Key Takeaways
Akhilesh Yadav alleged on 6 July that the Ram Temple donation theft case was assigned to an SIT instead of the CBI due to an internal BJP power struggle.
He claimed the BJP operates with two power centres — one in Lucknow and one in Delhi — and that the Lucknow faction moved first to control the probe.
Yadav accused those allegedly involved of crossing moral boundaries, invoking the concept of Maryada tied to Lord Ram .
Deputy CM Brajesh Pathak called the incident 'very unfortunate' but accused the SP and Congress of politicising a matter of faith.
Pathak alleged that the SP and Congress had historically opposed the Ram Temple and lacked standing to raise questions on the case.
Samajwadi Party (SP) chief Akhilesh Yadav on Monday, 6 July alleged that the decision to hand the Ram Temple donation theft case to a Special Investigation Team (SIT) — rather than central agencies like the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) — was driven by an internal power struggle within the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Speaking at a press conference in Lucknow, Yadav stopped short of naming the BJP directly but drew a pointed contrast between what he described as two competing power centres within the ruling party.
Akhilesh's Core Allegation
Yadav argued that the choice of investigating agency was not procedural but political. He contended that had the CBI, Enforcement Directorate (ED), or Income Tax department been assigned the case, control of the probe would have rested with the Delhi leadership of the ruling party — not the Lucknow faction, which he alleged moved swiftly to seize oversight through the SIT route.
'If it were the ED, CBI, or Income Tax, who would hold the reins of the investigation? And in whose hands does the SIT investigation lie?... All of this is happening because of a power struggle. There is a saying: Give a man power, and you will see his true character,' Yadav stated.
Yadav's Remarks on the Alleged Theft
The former Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister was unsparing in his characterisation of those allegedly involved. 'Offerings, donations, and contributions have fallen into the hands of a gang of thieves. They are unable to face the public's anger... they are terrified of this backlash, which is why they are staying holed up at home,' he said, addressing reporters.
He also invoked the symbolism of Lord Ram to sharpen his critique: 'People have completely lost their heads at the sight of money. Anyone who studies the life of Lord Ram knows about the Lakshman Rekha (the line of propriety); yet, everyone here has crossed the boundaries of Maryada (decorum and moral limits).'
BJP Hits Back at SP Chief
The BJP responded swiftly. Uttar Pradesh Deputy Chief Minister Brajesh Pathak acknowledged the incident as 'very unfortunate' but accused the Opposition of exploiting a matter of religious faith for political gain.
'The people of this country and every follower of Sanatan Dharma know that the Samajwadi Party and the Congress have consistently opposed the Ram Temple. They used to claim that it was not even certain that Lord Ram was born in Ayodhya. They even argued before the Supreme Court that Ram Lalla's birthplace had not been established,' Pathak told reporters.
Pathak further alleged that neither the SP nor the Indian National Congress (Congress) had the moral standing to question the handling of a case tied to Hindu faith. 'They have made several remarks against Lord Ram. Lord Ram will not forget what they have said. They have repeatedly tried to defame Sanatan Dharma... They will have to face the consequences,' he said.
Context and What Comes Next
The Ram Temple donation theft case has emerged as a politically charged flashpoint in Uttar Pradesh, with the Opposition using it to target the BJP-led state government ahead of a politically sensitive period. The formation of an SIT — rather than a referral to a central agency — has drawn scrutiny over the independence and scope of the investigation. Yadav's remarks signal that the SP intends to keep the issue alive in public discourse. How the SIT probe progresses, and whether the Centre weighs in, will determine whether the controversy deepens or recedes.
Point of View
He forces a conversation about BJP's internal coherence rather than Opposition credibility. The claim that the Lucknow faction pre-empted Delhi by locking in the SIT is unverified, but it is politically potent — it plants doubt about whether the probe is designed to find truth or manage exposure. The BJP's counter, leaning on the SP's historical opposition to the Ram Temple, is a deflection rather than a rebuttal of the specific allegation. If the SIT's findings are seen as incomplete or partial, Yadav's framing will gain traction well beyond his base.
NationPress
6 Jul 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Ram Temple donation theft case?
The Ram Temple donation theft case refers to an alleged incident involving the theft of offerings and donations at the Ram Temple in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh. An SIT has been formed to investigate the matter, though details of the alleged theft remain under probe.
Why does Akhilesh Yadav say the SIT was chosen over the CBI?
Yadav alleges that the BJP's Lucknow faction chose to assign the case to an SIT — which it could control locally — rather than the CBI or ED, which would have been overseen by the party's Delhi leadership. He frames this as evidence of an internal BJP power struggle, not a procedural decision.
How did the BJP respond to Akhilesh Yadav's allegations?
Deputy Chief Minister Brajesh Pathak called the incident very unfortunate but accused the SP and Congress of politicising a matter of religious faith. He alleged both parties had historically opposed the Ram Temple and lacked the credibility to raise questions on the case.
Who is leading the SIT investigation into the Ram Temple donation case?
The source does not specify which officer or body is heading the SIT. The formation of the SIT itself — rather than its leadership — has been the focus of the political controversy.
What is the political significance of this row for Uttar Pradesh?
The case has become a flashpoint between the SP and the BJP-led UP government, with the Opposition using it to allege mismanagement of public faith and internal BJP dysfunction. It is likely to remain a campaign issue given Uttar Pradesh's electoral importance.
