Indian Thought Latest News & Views
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday directed that the Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing the alleged misappropriation of donations at the Ayodhya Ram Mandir be strengthened by including a financial expert. During the hearing, the Uttar Pradesh government informed the court that it had already reconstituted the SIT with senior police officers to ensure an impartial investigation.
Appearing for the state, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the bench that the new SIT had been formed in compliance with the Supreme Court’s earlier directions and would conduct a fair and transparent investigation.
Senior Police Officers Lead the Investigation
According to the Uttar Pradesh government, the reconstituted SIT is headed by Inspector General (IG) Kiran S. of the Lucknow Range. The team also includes Deputy Inspector General (DIG) Somen Verma of the Ayodhya Range and Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Gaurav Grover of Ayodhya.
Supreme Court Calls for Financial Expertise
The Supreme Court observed that the investigation should include financial scrutiny and suggested that the SIT be expanded to include a Chartered Accountant (CA) or a forensic auditor. The state government assured the court that a financial expert would soon be added to the team.
The court further directed the government to include a forensic auditor as an additional member to ensure a thorough examination of financial records related to the case.
First Status Report Due in Two Weeks
The bench adjourned the matter for two weeks and directed the SIT to submit its first status report before the next hearing. The court emphasized that the investigation must be conducted in a fair, transparent, and time-bound manner.
Court Emphasizes Transparency
During the proceedings, the bench stated that every necessary step would be taken to ensure transparency in the investigation. The judges reiterated that the objective is to conduct an impartial inquiry without bias or delay.
It is important to note that the Supreme Court has not made any findings on the merits of the allegations. The matter remains under investigation, and the court’s directions are aimed at strengthening the investigative process.
