Ayodhya Temple Donation Case: Legal Framework for SIT, CBI and ED Investigations

The alleged misappropriation of donations linked with the Ayodhya Ram Temple has raised critical questions about which investigative agencies can step in, under what conditions, and how the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS 2023) and the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA 2002) may operate together. This FAQ-style guide, completely restructured and rephrased, explains the current status and potential future roles of the Special Investigation Team (SIT), the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

The discussion is divided into three broad chapters:

  1. Present investigative status and the possible entry of CBI and ED
  2. FIRs and offences invoked under BNS 2023
  3. How BNS offences can form the basis for CBI and ED action, including parallel investigations under PMLA 2002

Chapter I – Ayodhya Temple Donation (“Dan Chori”) Investigations by CBI and / or ED

1. What is meant by investigations by CBI and / or ED in the Ayodhya Dan Chori matter?

  • The expression “Ayodhya Dan Chori” broadly refers to allegations that offerings and donations (cash, gold, silver, jewellery and other valuables) linked to the Ayodhya temple have been stolen or misappropriated.
  • As of now, there is no official notification confirming that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has assumed control of the probe.
  • Whether CBI or ED ultimately steps in will depend on:
    • The nature and strength of evidence gathered
    • The legal character of the offences (including whether any scheduled offence under PMLA 2002 is made out)
    • Whether wider conspiracy, systemic diversion or laundering of large-value donations is demonstrated.
  • If the final report of the SIT reveals large-scale diversion of trust money, participation of influential individuals, or complex financial layering, the case for CBI and ED involvement becomes stronger.
  • Until a formal order or notification is issued, the investigation remains with the SIT formed by the Uttar Pradesh Police.

2. Under what circumstances can CBI investigate?

CBI is not a default investigating body; it requires a specific legal trigger. Investigation by CBI is typically permitted when:

  • The case involves serious criminal conspiracy, large-scale fraud, corruption, or matters of significant public importance.
  • Valid consent is given by the relevant Government (Central or State, as applicable) or
  • The Supreme Court of India or a High Court directs CBI to investigate.
  • The Central Government lawfully entrusts the case to CBI in accordance with applicable legal provisions.
  • The SIT or local police uncover evidence of a wider web of conspiracy, involvement of high-ranking officials, or inter-state ramifications.

3. When can ED initiate a money-laundering investigation?

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) does not investigate the theft or breach of trust itself. Its jurisdiction starts only when money laundering under PMLA 2002 is prima facie indicated. This usually requires:

  • Proof that the alleged Proceeds of Crime (PoC) arise from a scheduled offence under PMLA 2002.
  • Registration of the underlying scheduled (predicate) offence by police, CBI or any other competent agency.
  • Evidence that such PoC has been:
    • Concealed
    • Possessed
    • Acquired
    • Used
    • Projected as untainted or
    • Claimed as untainted
  • Reports that the police/SIT have seized substantial cash, precious metals and other properties, and are examining an extensive money trail, may provide a factual basis.
  • Once the SIT/Police establish that alleged theft or breach of trust generated PoC from a scheduled offence, ED can register an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) and commence an independent money-laundering investigation.

4. What is the present status of CBI / ED involvement?

  • At this stage, in the absence of confirmed proof of a scheduled offence being pursued for money laundering, ED’s involvement remains a matter of legal possibility, not fact.
  • CBI’s entry will typically require:
    • Consent of the appropriate Government (where required), or
    • A direction from the Supreme Court of India or relevant High Court, or
    • A proper Central Government decision conferring the case on CBI.

5. What is the current position of the SIT investigation?

  • Publicly available information suggests that the probe being led by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) of the Uttar Pradesh Police is ongoing and has been formally extended.
  • There is no public declaration that the probe has been taken over by CBI or ED.
  • The SIT remains the primary investigating authority for now.

6. What is the status of demands for a CBI probe?

  • A PIL demanding a CBI investigation has already reached the Supreme Court of India.
  • The Supreme Court has, however, declined urgent hearing, thereby not ordering any CBI investigation at this stage. The matter may still be heard in due course subject to the Court’s schedule and discretion.

7. Overall status of the case on facts

  • As reported in the public domain, 8 accused have been arrested and sent to judicial custody.
  • The scope of investigation has broadened to cover:
    • Bank account deposits
    • Comparison of actual collections with recorded donation figures
  • Law enforcement agencies are examining:
    • Allegedly disproportionate assets
    • Flow of funds from the temple donation system into private hands

Chapter II – FIRs and Key Offences Under BNS 2023 in the Ayodhya Dan Chori Matter

Media reports indicate that FIRs concerning the alleged Ayodhya Ram Temple donation theft have been lodged invoking multiple provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS 2023).

9. Theft by clerk or servant – Section 306 BNS 2023

  • FIRs refer to Section 306 for situations where a clerk, servant, or a person employed in such capacity steals property that is in the possession of their employer (master).
  • The offence deals with abuse of employment-based access to property belonging to the employer.

10. Essential elements of Section 306 BNS 2023

To secure a conviction, prosecution must show:

  1. The accused was working as a clerk, servant or in a similar role.
  2. The property was in the employer’s possession.
  3. The accused committed theft of that property.
  4. The theft was connected with, or facilitated by, the employment relationship.

11. Punishment prescribed under Section 306 BNS 2023

  • Imprisonment up to 7 years; and
  • Liability to fine.

12. Corresponding IPC provision

  • Section 306 BNS 2023 is the modern counterpart of Section 381 of IPC 1860.
  • The basic nature of the offence and punishment is substantially similar.

13. Aggravated criminal breach of trust – Section 316(5) BNS 2023

  • Section 316(5) has been invoked for aggravated criminal breach of trust where the accused was entrusted with property in a fiduciary or employment-related capacity.
  • The offence is termed “aggravated” because it involves people in positions of special confidence like public servants or bankers.

14. Ingredients of Section 316(5) BNS 2023

To prove this offence, it is generally necessary to establish:

  1. Entrustment of property to the accused or dominion over the property.
  2. The entrustment arose due to a specific role such as:
    • Public servant
    • Banker
    • Agent (and other capacities listed in the provision)