The answer is: Gave them back

Matt 27:3-4 - He threw them down in front of the chief priests and elders, and being tainted money they decided they couldn't put it in the treasury and so bought a field instead in which to bury strangers

Judas Iscariot's dramatic turn against Jesus is a haunting chapter in the Gospel of Matthew. After realizing the magnitude of his betrayal, he returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests with remorse, telling them, “I have sinned by betraying innocent blood.” This instant regret is a stark contrast to the skilled negotiation he undertook beforehand. Isn't it fascinating how this narrative highlights not just the morality of Judas's actions but the consequences of greed and guilt?

With their newfound blood money, the religious leaders rejected using it for sacred purposes, signifying further aversion to defilement. Instead, they purchased the Potters’ Field, known today as Aceldama or the Field of Blood. This peculiar twist introduces a layer of irony and, through its echo in history, symbolizes the ultimate cost of betraying trust.

Historically, thirty pieces of silver was the prescribed compensation for the loss of a slave, showcasing how devalued Judas had become in his own story. Additionally, if we look to Zechariah 11:12-13, the scriptural allusions become even richer, as the act of payment for betrayal had its prophetic roots deeply embedded in the culture. Also, let’s not overlook another intriguing echo: both Judas’ betrayal and Peter's denial are intricately tied, representing different responses to fragility, temptation, and forgiveness. It's a saga that reminds us of those choices in daunting moments that shape our narratives, reflecting the enduring nature of accountability.