Claim
The complaint alleges that theft was carried out for a long time by placing close associates in donation counting, and that the SIT was used to suppress the case and shield the real accused.
“इस शिकायत में आरोप लगाया गया है कि दान की गिनती में अपने करीबी लोगों को लगाकर लंबे समय से चोरी कराई जा रही थी। एसआईटी का इस्तेमाल मामले को दबाने और असली आरोपियों को बचाने के लिए किया गया।”▶ Watch source segment
Rationale
The claim reports the content of a complaint/allegation, not the theft as proven fact, and is framed with 'आरोप लगाया गया है' (it is alleged). In the Ayodhya Ram Mandir donation-theft case, such complaints and allegations demonstrably existed around 2 July 2026: the Faizabad Bar Association filed a criminal complaint against senior Trust officials (Champat Rai, Anil Mishra, Gopal Rao) for embezzling donations, and opposition figures (Congress, Arvind Kejriwal) publicly alleged the SIT/FIR was only a formality that arrested the counting staff ('close associates' placed at donation counting) while shielding the real, bigger accused. Both elements of the claim — long-term theft via close associates in counting, and the SIT being used to suppress/shield real accused — accurately reflect the allegations made. Confidence is slightly below certainty because the two allegations were spread across multiple complaints/statements rather than verifiably contained in one single complaint document.
Evidence
- https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/top-headlines/ram-mandir-donation-theft-faizabad-lawyers-file-criminal-complaint-against-champat-rai/ Faizabad Bar Association filed a criminal complaint seeking an FIR against Trust ex-general secretary Champat Rai, ex-member Anil Mishra and administrator Gopal Rao over the Ram Temple donation embezzlement — i.e. a formal complaint targeting senior officials, not just the arrested counting staff. ✓ reachable · archived
- https://navbharatlive.com/goa/arvind-kejriwal-targets-center-over-ram-mandir-donation-scam-allegations-1838969.html Kejriwal alleged the SIT, FIR and arrests are mere formalities ('औपचारिक कार्रवाई') and that the real culprits ('असली चोरों को बचाया जा रहा') are being shielded — matching the claim's SIT-cover-up allegation. ✓ reachable · archived
- https://www.aajtak.in/uttar-pradesh/story/ayodhya-ram-mandir-chadhava-chori-fir-sit-report-champat-rai-questions-ntc-rlch-rptc-2587564-2026-06-25 Opposition and complainants alleged senior Trust officials' names were missing from the FIR though the allegations were against them, and that only the counting staff (close associates placed at counting) were booked — the systematic long-term theft framing. ✓ reachable · archived
- https://navbharatlive.com/uttar-pradesh/ayodhya/ram-mandir-donation-theft-congress-bjp-sit-row-1839308.html Congress questioned the SIT's fairness and demanded a Supreme Court-monitored probe, alleging the state SIT was shielding the real accused. ✓ reachable · archived