The Karnataka Government has appointed Inspector General of Police Chetan Singh Rathore as the new head of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing the 2012 Dharmasthala rape and murder case, replacing N Shashi Kumar after objections were raised over the team’s composition.
The appointment was formalised through a rectification order issued on October 30, amending the government’s September 24 order that constituted the five-member SIT. Rathore, who is with the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), will now lead the fresh investigation ordered by the Supreme Court.
The government has also replaced Additional Superintendent of Police Venkatesh Prasanna, who was serving as Additional SP, Bengaluru Rural. He has been replaced in the SIT by Srinidhi, Additional SP, Hassan district. The remaining appointments have been retained, according to the report by The Indian Express.
N Shashi Kumar had sought to be relieved of the responsibility, reportedly citing personal reasons. His departure came after objections from the victim’s family and activists. The victim’s mother had questioned whether the earlier appointment of the SIT chief complied with the Supreme Court’s direction to select experienced investigators familiar with modern investigative technology.
In a statement issued on September 26, she urged the Karnataka Government to appoint honest and efficient officers capable of conducting a transparent investigation without pressure. Social activist Shekhar Laila had also called for the removal of Shashi Kumar and Venkatesh Prasanna, alleging that the officers faced corruption and other charges. Activists further raised concerns about Shashi Kumar’s alleged proximity to the Dharmasthala temple administration during his tenure as Mangaluru City Police Commissioner. These allegations and concerns were reported by The Indian Express; the supplied report does not indicate any adjudication of them.
The SIT has begun reviewing investigations conducted earlier by the local police, the CID and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). It has issued notices under Section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to more than 15 police officers and personnel involved at different stages of the earlier probes. Eight personnel appeared before the SIT at its Mangaluru office on October 29 and were questioned, including former SIT officer Kalaimar, head constable Sundar Shetty, woman head constable Savitha Shetty and retired SIT officer Kushalappa Gowda.
The team has also collected a blood sample from the victim’s mother at the Belthangady court for DNA analysis and sought original documents and evidence from the CID and CBI. The investigation is examining forensic material and records from the previous inquiries.
The Supreme Court’s September 21 judgment had ordered a de novo investigation after identifying lapses in the collection and preservation of evidence and the examination of crucial witnesses. The court referred to six hair samples recovered from the victim’s clothing, including one belonging to another male individual, and said the sample could still be compared with potential suspects through DNA analysis. It also noted that the vaginal swab had become unusable because of improper preservation and fungal growth.
The judgment recorded other alleged investigative lapses, including the failure to recover the victim’s inner garments, umbrella and slippers, secure CCTV footage, and videograph the crime scene and post-mortem. The court also questioned why earlier agencies had not examined certain leads when eight potential witnesses were located within three weeks after being directed to provide them protection.
The 17-year-old college student went missing in Dakshina Kannada on October 9, 2012, while returning home. Her body was found in a forested area in Dharmasthala the following day. The local police initially investigated the case, followed by the CID and then the CBI in 2014. Santhosh Rao, who had been identified as the sole accused, was acquitted by a special CBI court in Bengaluru on June 16, 2023, after the prosecution failed to establish the charges. The Supreme Court barred further investigation or prosecution of Rao, while clarifying that its observations did not express a prima facie view on the role of Mallik Jain, Dheeraj Jain and Uday Jain. The new SIT has been directed to complete its investigation within three months.
