Information about theft of offerings in Ram temple was received on June 5, but on June 25, FIR was registered against 8 people. That means 20 days after the theft was detected. Was the evidence of theft of offerings completely erased in these 20 days? This question is being asked continuously and the police investigation may perhaps give answers to these questions to the Ram devotees, but one conclusion is emerging from the investigation and records so far and that is that the evidence was present. The theft had also been discovered. Despite this, evidence was probably being destroyed secretly and Ram Mandir Offerings kept being stolen from the temple, now if this is not cheating crores of devotees then what is it?

There are many more developments in this complex matter. Let us understand the complete date and chronology of questions in simple words, from which you can get many answers.

Now everyone is aware that the game of stealing offerings was not going on for weeks or months but for years. But no one was allowed to know about it and when it was known, a secret investigation was started.

The Trust had received information about the theft on June 4 itself.

According to sources, the temple trust had received information about the theft on June 4 even before it became public.The very next day, on June 5, the Trust officials, along with private security personnel and the police, recovered about Rs 58 lakh from the houses of the accused.

• Whereas the accused had withdrawn the remaining amount from their bank accounts and returned it to the Trust by June 8.
• In many cases, the accused handed over the amount in writing which is also signed by their families.
• Despite total recovery of around Rs 80 lakh, FIR was not lodged for about 20 days.
• Due to which serious questions have been raised on the role of trust officers Champat Rai and Anil Mishra.

Sources claim that some employees engaged in counting the offerings were misappropriating the amount for a long time. That is why there is a possibility that the actual amount of theft may be much more than the recovered amount. The investigating agencies are now investigating this entire network and the possible huge financial loss.

Did the Trust want to settle the matter secretly?

During the investigation, the most suspicion is being cast on Tinnu Yadav. Sources say that jewelery and other metals given as offerings were also found with him. Interestingly, when recovery was being done from the houses of other accused, the investigation team did not reach Tinnu's house on the first day.

It is claimed that after interrogation, he asked for only one lakh rupees and gave it, which raises the question whether he got a chance to dispose of the remaining money and goods.

Another surprising thing is that the official vehicle of the Trust was not used for recovery, because according to the rules, the use of these vehicles has to be written in the records, hence the recovery was done through private vehicles.

So the question is whether the Trust wanted to secretly investigate and settle the case of theft of offering and whether the recovery of the amount was also being done so that if ever the question arose, it could be argued that the offering did exist, but the secret was revealed. Therefore, now people are losing trust in the trust system itself.

Let's know the complete timeline of the theft case

• On June 4, Champat Rai, who was the general secretary of the trust, informed the police about the theft. The question is, how and from whom did Champat Rai get the information about the theft?
• On June 5, Ayodhya Police raided the hideouts of the suspects. Did only Champat Rai and Anil Mishra know this?
• On June 5 itself, Rs 80 lakh stolen was recovered. Now the question is where was the recovered amount of stolen offering kept?
• On June 5, there was a raid on Anukalp Mishra's house. Even if the stolen money was found, why was FIR not registered?
• Eight days later, on June 13, the government announced the formation of SIT. Then the question remains that when the FIR was not filed, did the evidence disappear during this period?
• On June 15, SIT reached Ayodhya for investigation. That is, 10 days after the theft was discovered, what was hidden in these 10 days?
• On June 15, it was revealed that there was no CCTV footage before April 27. What is the guarantee that offerings were not stolen before that?
• On June 25, FIR was registered against 8 people. That means 20 days after the theft was detected. Was the evidence of theft of offerings completely erased in these 20 days?
• When an FIR was registered on June 25 on the complaint of the Trust, the question is why a case was not filed against Champat Rai and Anil Mishra for destroying evidence?
• The SIT report was given to the Trust on 25 June. That is, why was the SIT report given to those who were under investigation?
• Champat Rai and Anil Mishra resigned on June 27, but why did the Treasurer not resign due to misappropriation of money?
• On June 26 and June 29, all eight accused were presented in the court, but why did the police not ask for remand? The question is why the police did not ask for remand of the accused?

An important question is whether anyone was protecting the dubious employees involved in the calculation of offerings and is the finger being pointed at the officials of the Trust regarding this too?

Some personnel were suspected only three months ago

According to sources, suspicion was raised on some employees engaged in calculation of donations three months ago and the process of removing such employees was also started, but due to the intervention of senior officials of the Trust, the action was stopped. The question is, who are those officials who were saving these thieves? Now the question being raised in the investigation is that if the suspicious personnel had been removed at the same time, would the alleged misappropriation in donations worth crores of rupees have been stopped?

According to sources, the employees involved in counting the donations were appointed by an outsourcing company through the State Bank. Many employees including Anukalp Mishra, Luvkush Mishra, Manish Yadav, Ramashankar Mishra, Avneesh and Karunesh Shukla were engaged in this work for a long time. A bank official became suspicious of his work, after which the process of replacing him was started.

It is said that the bank had also informed the trust about this proposal. Meanwhile, the concerned employees requested the Trust officials not to remove them. Sources claim that Trust General Secretary Champat Rai, Member Anil Mishra and Construction Assistant Gopal Rao intervened and told the bank officials that no employee should be removed. After this the change process was stopped.

Sources related to the investigation believe that due to the protection given to the employees, their morale increased and the process of manipulation in the offerings continued. If the employees had been changed in time, the network of theft could have been broken.

Bureau Report, TV9 Bharatvarsh

Read this also-Those MPs who can steal offerings can't steal votes - why can't Akhilesh attack BJP on Ram Temple issue