UP Dy CM Questions Babri Masjid Donations Amid Ram Temple Scam
Uttar Pradesh Deputy Chief Minister Brajesh Pathak questioned donations for the demolished Babri Masjid, targeting opposition parties amid an ongoing probe into alleged embezzlement of Ram Temple funds. He accused the Samajwadi Party and Congress of appeasement politics, linking it to the Ram Temple donation controversy and alleged illegal madrasa activities.
Key Highlights
- UP Deputy CM Pathak questioned Babri Masjid donations.
- Remarks made amid Ram Temple donation embezzlement probe.
- Pathak accused SP, Congress of appeasement politics.
- He alleged 'terror funding' in border district madrasas.
- FIR registered, eight arrested in Ram Temple funds case.
- Opposition claims lower-level staff are being shielded.
Uttar Pradesh Deputy Chief Minister Brajesh Pathak recently ignited a fresh political controversy by questioning the donations collected for the Babri Masjid, which was demolished in 1992. His remarks, made on Friday, June 26, 2026, in Mirzapur, came amidst an escalating row over alleged embezzlement of funds donated to the Ram Temple in Ayodhya. Pathak explicitly asked why no one was inquiring about the status of funds collected for the Babri Masjid, while opposition parties were heavily scrutinizing the Ram Temple donations.
The Deputy CM's statements are seen as a direct counter-attack against the Samajwadi Party (SP) and Congress, which have been vocal in demanding transparency and accountability regarding the Ram Temple donations. Pathak accused these parties of indulging in 'appeasement politics' and attacking 'Sanatan Dharma' to secure Muslim votes. He asserted that the BJP government maintains a 'zero tolerance' policy towards corruption and that a fair investigation would be conducted into the Ram Temple donation allegations.
The controversy surrounding the Ram Temple donations escalated after a Samajwadi Party MLA, Pawan Pandey, alleged that between ₹7 crore and ₹7.5 crore in donations were stolen or misappropriated from the temple. Following these allegations, the Uttar Pradesh government constituted a three-member Special Investigation Team (SIT) on June 13, 2026, to probe the matter. The SIT's preliminary inquiry led to the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) on June 25, 2026, and the subsequent arrest of eight individuals. These individuals include staff involved in counting and handling cash and valuables donated by devotees.
Opposition parties, however, have questioned the scope of the investigation, alleging that the FIR only names lower-level employees and protects senior functionaries of the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust. The general secretary of the temple trust, Champat Rai, was also questioned by the SIT, and some reports even indicated his resignation amidst the probe. Pathak, in response to these criticisms, emphasized that the police would conduct an impartial investigation and that no one found guilty would be spared.
Beyond the Babri Masjid donations, Pathak also raised concerns about 'illegal activities, including terror funding' in madrasas located in border districts. He stated that the state government has been actively identifying and shutting down such illegal operations and taking legal action against those responsible. This broader allegation further intensified the political rhetoric surrounding the ongoing debates. The timing of Pathak's remarks, coinciding with a significant development in the Ram Temple donation probe, highlights the interwoven nature of religious, political, and financial issues in India. The reference to Babri Masjid, a deeply sensitive issue in Indian history, serves to shift the narrative and put the opposition on the defensive regarding past events, while simultaneously defending the current government's handling of the Ram Temple funds. The public and political discourse remains charged, with both the ruling party and the opposition trading accusations and demanding accountability on matters of faith and public trust. The Ram Mandir's Pran Pratishtha ceremony, which took place in January 2024, followed the Supreme Court's 2019 verdict that awarded the disputed land to the Hindu side for temple construction, while also directing the allotment of five acres for a new mosque elsewhere.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary controversy surrounding Ram Temple donations?
The controversy stems from allegations by a Samajwadi Party MLA of embezzlement, claiming that between ₹7 crore and ₹7.5 crore in donations for the Ram Temple in Ayodhya were stolen or misappropriated. This led to a Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe and several arrests.
What were UP Deputy CM Brajesh Pathak's key statements?
Brajesh Pathak questioned why no one was asking about donations collected for the Babri Masjid, while simultaneously accusing the Samajwadi Party and Congress of engaging in 'appeasement politics' and attacking 'Sanatan Dharma' in the context of the Ram Temple donation controversy. He also alleged terror funding in illegal madrasas.
When were these statements made and what was the immediate trigger?
Brajesh Pathak made these statements on Friday, June 26, 2026. The immediate trigger was the registration of an FIR by Ayodhya Police on June 25, 2026, concerning alleged embezzlement of donations at the Ram Temple, following the SIT's recommendations.
What is the status of the investigation into the Ram Temple donation allegations?
A Special Investigation Team (SIT) was formed, an FIR was registered, and eight people have been arrested in connection with the alleged embezzlement. The UP government has stated that strict action will be taken against anyone found guilty, emphasizing a 'zero tolerance' policy on corruption.
How did opposition parties react to the Ram Temple donation probe and Pathak's remarks?
Opposition parties, including the Samajwadi Party and Congress, have criticized the investigation, alleging that only lower-level employees have been named in the FIR, thereby shielding senior functionaries of the temple trust. They have also been accused by Pathak of politicizing the issue and engaging in appeasement politics.
