Ram Temple donation probe: SIT files sealed report in SC before July 20 hearing
Synopsis
The UP government's SIT has placed a sealed status report before the Supreme Court just days after being directed to do so — but petitioners seeking a CBI takeover and forensic audit have been kept in the dark about its contents. Monday's hearing before CJI Surya Kant's bench could decide whether India's most high-profile temple trust faces state or central scrutiny.
Key Takeaways
The UP government-appointed SIT filed its status report in a sealed cover before the Supreme Court ahead of the 20 July hearing.
The Bench of CJI Surya Kant , Justice Joymalya Bagchi , and Justice V.
Mohana will hear four petitions on Monday.
RJD MP Sudhakar Singh has sought transfer of the probe to the CBI under direct Supreme Court monitoring, along with a forensic audit.
The Supreme Court's 13 July order directed the SIT to submit the report along with full particulars of its composition.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta opposed sharing the report with petitioners, citing the ongoing investigation.
The court's Monday ruling could determine whether the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust probe shifts from state to central oversight.
The Uttar Pradesh government-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) has filed its status report in a sealed cover before the Supreme Court, ahead of a Monday, 20 July hearing on a batch of petitions seeking a court-monitored probe into alleged financial irregularities in the handling of donations and offerings received by the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust. The development marks a key procedural step in what has become one of the most politically sensitive temple-administration cases before the apex court.
Monday Hearing: What the Bench Will Examine
According to the cause list on the Supreme Court's official website, the petitions are scheduled before a Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana. The sealed status report, submitted by the SIT at the court's direction, will be the primary document before the Bench. The SIT was also required to disclose the full composition of its investigative team as part of the submission.
Who Has Petitioned and What They Seek
The batch before the court includes four separate pleas. Advocate Narendra Kumar Goswami has filed a writ petition seeking preservation of donation records and greater transparency in the administration of temple offerings. Petitioner-in-person Ajay Kumar Rai has filed a criminal writ petition. Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) Member of Parliament Sudhakar Singh has sought transfer of the probe to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) under direct Supreme Court monitoring, along with the appointment of a temporary oversight committee, a forensic audit, and mandatory publication of audited financial statements and donation logs on the Trust's official website. The Hindu Dharma Parishad has also filed a separate petition.
How the Court Got Here: The July 13 Order
The Supreme Court's direction to the SIT arose from its 13 July order, in which the CJI Kant-led Bench noted that FIRs had already been registered and an SIT constituted by Uttar Pradesh. The court ordered the SIT to submit a status report along with full particulars of its composition. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre and the Uttar Pradesh government, had informed the Bench that the report would be placed in a sealed cover, citing the ongoing nature of the investigation.
Sealed Report and the Petitioners' Objection
When petitioners requested that a copy of the status report also be furnished to them, Solicitor General Mehta opposed the request, arguing the investigation was still in progress. The Bench declined to share the report at that stage, observing: 'We will see later. It's an ongoing investigation. You know the law. We have passed an order.' The question of whether petitioners will be granted access to the report is expected to come up during the 20 July hearing.
What Happens Next
The Supreme Court's response to the sealed SIT report on Monday will determine whether the probe continues under state supervision or is escalated to CBI oversight. The court may also decide on the petitioners' long-pending request for access to the status report. The outcome carries significant implications for the governance and financial accountability of one of India's most prominent religious trusts.
Point of View
But its use here raises a pointed question: if the SIT's findings are credible and the investigation above board, why must the petitioners who triggered the court's attention be denied even a summary? The Supreme Court's own July 13 order acknowledged the existence of FIRs and an SIT — yet the state is now effectively arguing that the court alone should vet the probe's progress. That posture, combined with the opposition's push for a CBI transfer, suggests the political stakes around the Ram Janmabhoomi Trust's finances are far from settled. Monday's hearing will signal whether the court is content to let the state run the investigation or whether it sees grounds for independent oversight.
NationPress
20 Jul 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Ram Temple donation controversy before the Supreme Court?
The Supreme Court is hearing petitions alleging financial irregularities in the handling of donations and offerings received by the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust. The petitions seek a court-monitored probe, with some petitioners calling for a CBI investigation and a forensic audit of the Trust's finances.
What did the Supreme Court order on 13 July?
On 13 July, the CJI Surya Kant-led Bench directed the UP government's SIT to submit a status report before the Supreme Court, including full particulars of the SIT's composition. The court noted that FIRs had already been registered and an SIT constituted by Uttar Pradesh.
Why was the SIT status report filed in a sealed cover?
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre and the Uttar Pradesh government, informed the court that the report would be submitted in a sealed cover because the investigation is still ongoing. The court declined to share the report with petitioners at that stage.
Who are the petitioners and what do they want?
The four petitioners are advocate Narendra Kumar Goswami, petitioner-in-person Ajay Kumar Rai, RJD MP Sudhakar Singh, and the Hindu Dharma Parishad. Their demands range from preservation of donation records and greater transparency to a full CBI transfer, forensic audit, and public disclosure of the Trust's financial statements.
What happens at the 20 July Supreme Court hearing?
The Bench of CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V. Mohana will examine the SIT's sealed status report and hear arguments from all petitioners. The court may decide whether to continue with state-level investigation, grant petitioners access to the report, or escalate the probe to CBI oversight.
