In a startling revelation that raises serious concerns about misuse of public money and exploitation of vulnerable communities, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has alleged that a Hyderabad-based educational organisation not only siphoned off funds meant for underprivileged students under the Right to Education Act (RTE) but also misrepresented regular schoolchildren as ‘joginis’ to secure higher foreign donations. The case, involving the Operation Mercy India Foundation (OMIF), which runs the Good Shepherd Schools network across Telangana and other regions, has exposed what investigators describe as a complex web of financial irregularities, deceptive fundraising, and diversion of charitable funds.

On Tuesday, the ED announced that it had attached twelve immovable properties valued at around ₹15 crore as part of its ongoing investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). These properties—belonging to OMIF and associated entities—were allegedly acquired using funds diverted from school fee collections, RTE reimbursements, and foreign sponsorships meant for needy students. The agency stated that a response from OMIF regarding the allegations is awaited.

Alleged Misuse of RTE Funds and Concealed Government Aid

According to the ED’s findings, Good Shepherd Schools charged regular tuition fees, book fees, uniform fees, and transportation fees from all students, including those who were presented to donors and the public as fully sponsored beneficiaries from underprivileged backgrounds. In addition to these collections, the schools received sizeable financial support from the government under the Right to Education Act and scholarship schemes intended as reimbursements for providing free education to economically disadvantaged children.

However, as per the ED, these reimbursements were not passed on to the students or utilised for the intended purpose. Instead, they were allegedly diverted to the head office accounts of OMIF, bypassing the beneficiaries altogether. This created what investigators have identified as “proceeds of crime,” since the organisation allegedly received money from the government while continuing to charge the same students full fees.

Between the years 2011–12 and 2017–18, these dual streams of revenue—fee collections and government reimbursements—were also allegedly concealed from foreign donors who believed they were supporting the schooling of children from marginalised sections at no cost. The ED has quantified approximately ₹15.37 crore as the proceeds of crime linked to these financial diversions.

Misrepresentation of Students as ‘Joginis’ to Foreign Donors

One of the most troubling findings in the ED’s report is the claim that OMIF and its associated entities misrepresented ordinary schoolchildren as ‘joginis’—a term linked to an outlawed exploitative practice in some regions of India—in order to solicit larger sponsorship amounts from international donors.

Investigators allege that images of regular students were uploaded on donor websites and social media platforms with fabricated stories portraying them as ‘joginis’ in need of rescue and rehabilitation. In some instances, photographs of unrelated children were also used for the same purpose. Since many foreign donors were deeply moved by the plight of women and children trapped in the jogini system, they were reportedly willing to contribute far more for their support.

While regular sponsorships typically ranged from USD 20 to 28 per month, donations for “jogini rehabilitation” were significantly higher—between USD 60 and 68 per month. The ED has stated that this strategy allowed the organisation to raise larger sums based on misleading narratives, thereby inflating sponsorship earnings through deliberate misrepresentation.

Diversion of Funds to Religious Activities and Overseas Travel

As the probe widened, the ED claimed to have uncovered additional layers of financial misuse. One of the affiliated entities, the Good Shepherd Community Society, which is engaged in religious and community-related activities, allegedly used school fee collections for church expenses and the purchase of immovable properties. This indicates, according to investigators, that funds originally meant for educational purposes were directed toward unrelated and unauthorised uses.

Moreover, the ED states that OMIF diverted portions of the money received under the guise of education sponsorship towards the “core activities” of various affiliated entities, some of which were not connected to schooling at all. A significant part of the diverted funds was allegedly used to finance what the ED describes as extravagant foreign travel undertaken by senior organisational figures.

One key functionary named in the report is Dr Joseph Gregory D’Souza, who allegedly travelled abroad in business class using money that was originally donated for the education of children from Dalit and other marginalised backgrounds. According to the ED, this constitutes a clear diversion of funds away from charitable objectives and into personal or organisational luxury.

Foreign Contributions and FCRA Action

OMIF is said to have received substantial foreign sponsorships over several years, largely from donors in Europe, North America, and Australia, who were told their contributions would fund education, hostel facilities, infrastructural development, and welfare support for underprivileged children. The ED claims that a portion of these funds was siphoned off, concealed, or misappropriated.

As the financial investigation progressed, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) reportedly initiated its own scrutiny under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA). The ministry has since ordered the non-renewal of FCRA licences for several OM India entities linked to OMIF. Additionally, the accounts of these organisations have been frozen, preventing any further movement of foreign funds until the investigation concludes.

A Case That Raises Larger Concerns

The allegations against OMIF highlight broader concerns relating to the monitoring and governance of non-profit organisations that receive both government aid and foreign funding. The case touches upon multiple sensitive issues: misuse of RTE funds meant to ensure equitable access to education, exploitation of religious or cultural imagery to manipulate foreign donors, and the lack of transparency in financial reporting among institutions claiming to work for the public good.

Children—especially those from socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds—are often the first to suffer when institutions fail to uphold accountability. In this case, the ED alleges that students not only lost access to rightful resources but were also unknowingly made part of deceptive fundraising campaigns.

What Comes Next

With assets worth ₹15 crore attached and the probe still underway, the ED is expected to conduct further examinations of financial documents, donor communications, and organisational transactions related to OMIF and its affiliates. The agency has not ruled out additional attachments or charges as new evidence emerges.

Responses from OMIF and its leadership remain pending. Once they submit their statements, the ED will weigh them against the findings collected through searches, bank transactions, school records, and digital evidence.

The case underscores the need for tighter oversight, ethical governance in educational institutions, and stronger protection mechanisms for beneficiaries of welfare programmes. As the investigation continues, questions remain about how many other organisations may be engaging in similar practices—and how such gaps in the system can be addressed to protect both donors and vulnerable communities.