HT has discovered that six of the eight men arrested in connection with fundraising irregularities at the Ram temple were on the payroll of a Varanasi-based security agency that provided manpower for the cash-counting operation at the shrine in Ayodhya.
This agency – Sainik Security Services – was established in its present form with a registered address in Varanasi and a paid-up capital of Rs $1 lakh in December 2017, according to the Ministry of Corporate Affairs database.
Gaurav Singh, owner and director of Sainik Security Services in Varanasi, said the agency was appointed by the State Bank of India (SBI), Naya Ghat branch, in Ayodhya for the cash counting operation. This branch is one of the three bank branches where Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Tirath Kshetra Trust had an account. He added that the branch recommended including the names of 19 people within the cash inventory team.
Also Read: How donations were calculated at Ram Temple in Ayodhya and how it differed from other UP temples
“Usually it is the corporate office that drives the demand, but in this case, the local branch raises the demand for the 19 employees,” Gaurav Singh said. He added: “In this case, the branch asked us to bring 19 of its members who had previously been deployed into our fold and introduce them to the branch. We did so. The request was raised by the local branch.”
SBI said it is cooperating with SIT. SBI said in a statement that it has provided confidence with banking services since the Pran Pratishtha ceremony in January 2024.
“Normally, such appointments are made at the corporate level or at the central level,” said a senior SBI official in Lucknow, requesting anonymity.
According to the agency’s website, it operates in 15 states and lists a number of government companies among its clients.
Read also: ₹A fine of 5 lakhs if the accused in the Ram temple donation case represents: Ayodhya Organ Association $A fine of 5 lakhs if the accused in the Ram temple donation case is represented by: Ayodhya Advocates for Organs
Documents submitted by Ayodhya police to the court of Additional District Anti-Corruption Magistrate Rajat Varma revealed that six of the eight accused were receiving money from the Varanasi-based agency, people familiar with the matter said.
Police officers aware of the matter said that the eight men arrested so far are Anukalp Mishra, Lavkush Mishra, Ram Shankar Yadav ‘Tino’, Manish Yadav, Subhash Srivastava, Avinash Shukla, Rama Shankar Mishra and Karunesh Pandey.
“Ram Shankar Yadav received his wages from the trust fund, and Srivastava, a former employee of the bank, did not withdraw wages, according to a person in the trust who asked not to be named,” said a person in the trust who asked not to be named.
Also read: Warning ignored, SOPs flouted: Five questions at the heart of the donation case in Ayodhya
Anukalp Mishra and Luvkush Mishra are linked to each other, as well as to trust member Anil Mishra, who resigned last week along with trust general secretary Champat Rai. Ram Shankar Yadav – Rai’s assistant – and Manish Yadav are linked.
Gaurav Singh said that each of the 19 people received their wages $20,000 per month. He added: “My father founded it in 2000 as a proprietary unit, then it grew and turned into a partnership company, and then turned into a private limited company later in 2017. I became the director then.”
HT reported on Tuesday that officials at the SBI branch alleged that some members of the trust put pressure on the bank to include certain people in the counting team. “They were strong, we could not refuse… They are now under the microscope to put pressure on the SBI to include certain people in the money counting business,” said a senior bank official requesting anonymity.
Earlier, in a statement issued on Sunday, the SBI said it is fully cooperating with the Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing the alleged irregularities in the handling of donations collected through donation boxes at the Ram temple in Ayodhya. In the statement, SBI said it has been providing banking services to the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust since the Pran Pratishtha ceremony in 2024. The bank said it has extended full cooperation to SIT during the investigation and remains committed to assisting the ongoing investigation.
Gaurav Singh clarified that his relationship was with the bank branch, not the trust.
“The temple is not our client. SBI is. We are the second vendor. I don’t want to make any comment on this as I have nothing to do with the temple. Sainik Security Services provided the bank with the manpower it wanted. On the bank’s recommendation, Sainik Security Services hired 19 people as caretakers (workers) and handed them over to the bank,” Gaurav Singh said.
The police have already recovered $79.85 lakh in cash from seven of the eight accused during the searches.
When did the controversy arise?
The controversy first surfaced on June 7 when Samajwadi Party leader Tej Narayan “Pawan” Pandey claimed the donations were worth… $5 Crores $Rs 7.5 crore has been withdrawn from the temple offerings.
On June 13, the state government formed a special investigation team at the request of the Temple Trust. The committee – comprising Lucknow District Commissioner Vijay Vishwas Pant, Lucknow District Inspector General Kiran S and Special Secretary (Finance) Neil Ratan – conducted a preliminary investigation in Ayodhya from June 15 to 20 and observed prima facie irregularities in the handling of cash and valuables offered by devotees.
According to investigators, the investigation prima facie revealed a systematic transfer of money during the addition and counting process. The court claimed that a portion of the offerings were withdrawn before being deposited in the temple’s designated bank account, leading to the arrest of eight employees associated with handling and counting donations on June 26.
Last week, an FIR was registered against eight named accused and other unidentified persons under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Sections 306, 316 (5), 317 (4), 317 (5), 61 and 3 (5), relating to offenses like criminal breach of trust, cheating, theft and criminal conspiracy, along with Section 13 (1) (a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
