Hindu devotees funds diverted, misappropriated and illegally disbursed to foreign nationals by govt official in Vishakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh
Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India 
13 April, 2026
Case Summary
In Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, Hindu temple funds were misused by the District Collector. He misappropriated the funds to provide financial assistance to foreign nationals. A criminal complaint was filed seeking an official probe into the actions of the district administration. The incident involved Muttimbaku Abhishikth Kishore, the District Collector of Visakhapatnam, who sanctioned financial aid to two Iranian nationals studying in India. Each individual was granted ₹50,000 from the District Sanjeevani Fund, a public welfare scheme intended for emergency medical assistance to economically weaker Indian citizens. In addition to this, ₹50,000 each was disbursed from the funds of the Sri Kanaka Mahalakshmi Temple, taking the total assistance to over ₹1 lakh per person. The Sri Kanaka Mahalakshmi Temple is a prominent and revered Hindu temple in Visakhapatnam, with its funds governed under the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act. These funds are meant strictly for religious purposes, temple maintenance, rituals, and activities associated with the faith. The diversion of these funds for purposes unrelated to temple functions, particularly for the benefit of foreign nationals, stood in direct contradiction to the statutory framework governing temple administration. A formal complaint was filed by the Legal Rights Protection Forum before the Department of Personnel and Training and the Government of Andhra Pradesh. The complaint stated that the District Sanjeevani Fund had defined guidelines restricting its use to medical emergencies of Indian citizens and did not permit disbursal to foreign nationals. It further stated that such assistance, if required for foreign individuals, should have been routed through appropriate diplomatic or central government channels, including the Ministry of External Affairs or the concerned embassy. The complaint described the act as a misuse of both public welfare resources and temple funds, raising concerns about violations of statutory provisions, breaches of fiduciary responsibility, and abuse of official authority. It sought a detailed investigation into the matter, recovery of the disbursed funds, and initiation of both disciplinary and criminal proceedings against the District Collector. The matter drew attention due to the involvement of a Hindu temple’s funds, which devotees considered sacred and meant exclusively for religious purposes. The use of these funds outside their intended scope led to concerns among members of the Hindu community regarding the management and protection of temple resources.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case is being added to the tracker under the primary category- Attack on Hindu religious representations. The sub-category selected is Breaking the rules of the place of worship. Sanatan Dharma is not a religion of one book, which is to say that while it has religious scriptures that form the central tenets of the faith, there are several traditions followed through thousands of years, mostly passed from generation to generation orally. One of these oral traditions or written traditions is the rules of specific temples. Certain temples have rules that are traditional, dependent on the worship of the presiding deities. These rules and traditions have been followed for thousands of years, whether they find scriptural mention or not. Such traditions are based on the nature and rules of worship of the presiding deity of that temple. Any non-compliance of these traditions owing to animosity towards the faith or for the sake of activism stems not only from the lack of faith in the presiding deity but also disregard for the faith of the devotees of that deity/temple and implicit bias against the faith, the tradition and the deity itself. Since these specific traditions are central to the faith of the devotees of that specific temple and presiding deity, any non-compliance with these traditional rules would be considered a religiously motivated hate crime. The incident showed a direct departure from the established norms governing a Hindu temple and its sacred resources. Funds offered at temples are not ordinary financial reserves. They are given by devotees with faith, as part of seva and religious duty, and are meant to be used strictly for rituals, maintenance of the temple, welfare of priests, and activities connected to the presiding deity. Diverting such funds for purposes unrelated to the temple broke the traditional framework under which these institutions functioned for generations. In Hindu practice, the sanctity of a temple is not limited to its physical structure. It extends to everything associated with it, including its finances. The use of temple funds carries a spiritual obligation. It must align with the customs and practices of that specific temple. When funds meant for religious purposes were channelled towards individuals outside that religious and institutional framework, it amounted to a clear disregard of those long-standing traditions that devotees considered integral to their faith. The issue was not limited to administrative irregularity. It struck at the belief system of devotees who contributed to the temple with the expectation that their offerings would serve the deity and the religious ecosystem. Such a diversion weakened that trust. It sent a message that the sanctity attached to temple customs and financial practices could be set aside, even when they formed the core of how devotees engaged with their faith. The impact of such actions was deeper than a financial decision. For many Hindus, temples represent continuity, discipline, and adherence to age-old traditions. When those traditions are bypassed, it creates a sense of violation. Devotees were left with the feeling that their religious practices and contributions were not being respected. This eroded confidence in the protection of temple traditions and raised concerns about the broader treatment of Hindu institutions. Taken together, the facts reflected not just a procedural lapse but a clear break from the customary and religious boundaries that govern temple functioning. The use of sacred funds outside their intended purpose showed disregard for the traditions tied to the temple and the faith of its devotees. Such conduct carried the imprint of insensitivity towards Hindu religious practices and therefore qualified as a targeted affront to the sanctity of those traditions. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records incident dates based on when the crime occurs, rather than when it is reported in the media. In this case, the exact date of the defilement was not specified in the source material. Therefore, the date on which the incident came to light and was reported has been recorded as the indicative incident date for documentation purposes.
Case Status
Complaint filed
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
State and Establishment
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
