Investigators in New Delhi have uncovered fresh digital evidence in their inquiry into the alleged murder of Ketan Agarwal, including purported Snapchat conversations and what authorities believe are intentionally coded messages between the two accused. While police are treating these digital records as potentially significant to the case, questions remain about their authenticity and ultimate evidentiary weight in court proceedings.
The investigation centres on allegations that Siya Goyal, who was engaged to the deceased, and co-accused Chetan Chaudhary conspired to murder Agarwal before attempting to destroy evidence and obstruct the investigation. According to police sources, the digital exchanges being analysed could prove crucial in reconstructing the sequence of events following the alleged killing and determining whether the accused deliberately engaged in activities designed to create false impressions of normalcy.
One particularly noteworthy piece of evidence is an alleged Snapchat exchange in which Siya purportedly requested a friend to provide her Aadhaar card details ostensibly to book flight tickets. In the alleged message, Siya wrote: "Send me your Aadhaar card to book tickets for a wedding that is never going to happen." Investigators suspect this request was part of a calculated effort to make it appear that wedding preparations were continuing despite Agarwal's death, thereby deflecting suspicion from the accused and creating a false narrative of ordinary life proceeding as normal.
The implications of such digital breadcrumbs are significant in contemporary criminal investigations. Snapchat messages, while often assumed to disappear automatically, can be recovered through digital forensics, and their apparent casual nature may have caused the accused to underestimate their evidentiary value. The reference to a wedding "that is never going to happen" takes on dark significance if interpreted as an acknowledgement of events the accused wished to conceal, though police have not yet definitively established the authenticity of the conversation or its exact meaning.
Forensic examination of deleted data from mobile phones has also revealed what investigators describe as coded communications between Siya and Chetan following the alleged murder. Police believe these exchanges were deliberately obscured to prevent easy interpretation by investigators or third parties who might access the messages. The nature of these codes—whether they involved symbolic references, abbreviations, or pre-arranged terminology—has not been disclosed, but their very existence suggests consciousness of guilt and deliberate obstruction.
The investigation team, led by Investigating Officer Manoj Pawar, presented their findings during a court hearing where they sought an extension of custodial interrogation to further question the accused together, decode the alleged conversations, and establish clearer motives and roles. Police argued that additional time in custody was essential to progress the investigation, contending that questioning both accused simultaneously could reveal inconsistencies or lead to further revelations.
However, the local court declined the police request for three additional days of custodial interrogation, instead remanding both accused to 14 days of judicial custody. This decision reflects judicial caution about extending police custody beyond reasonable limits, a safeguard built into Indian criminal procedure to prevent custodial excesses. The court's judgment suggests it was not persuaded that further detention was absolutely necessary at that particular stage, though the investigation itself continues.
Physical evidence collected during the investigation adds another layer to the alleged conspiracy. A panchnama—an official record of inspection—was conducted at a location where Siya is suspected of tearing up Ketan's passport, a significant act that would facilitate preventing the deceased from being misidentified or from any theoretical future travel complications. Police also seized Siya's clothing as part of their forensic examination, suggesting they are testing for biological or other trace evidence linking her to the crime scene or the alleged disposal of evidence.
The discovery of a second mobile phone belonging to Siya proved particularly revealing, with examination showing what investigators characterise as coded conversations. The existence of a secondary device itself is noteworthy, as it suggests deliberate compartmentalisation of communications—a pattern sometimes seen when individuals seek to maintain separate channels for sensitive or incriminating discussions. Such practices often indicate premeditation and awareness that certain communications might face scrutiny.
During court proceedings, the question of conducting narco analysis on the accused arose. This controversial investigative technique, which involves administering truth-serum-like drugs to potentially loosen inhibitions, cannot be performed in India without the explicit consent of the subject. Both Siya and Chetan refused to undergo the procedure, and the court upheld their right to decline, denying police permission to proceed. Notably, the prosecution itself indicated that it did not consider narco analysis necessary at the current stage, suggesting investigators believe they have sufficient leads to pursue through conventional means.
For Malaysian and regional observers, this case illustrates how digital forensics have become central to contemporary murder investigations across South Asia. The reliance on Snapchat messages, coded phone exchanges, and recovered deleted data reflects how modern criminals often underestimate the permanence of their digital footprints. Even messages designed to disappear can be reconstructed, and coded language may ultimately prove less protective than perpetrators anticipate when facing skilled digital investigators.
The investigation remains ongoing, with authorities continuing to verify the authenticity of the digital evidence and build their case systematically. The courts' measured approach—balancing police investigative needs against protections against custodial abuse—demonstrates how the Indian judicial system applies procedural safeguards even in serious cases. As the investigation progresses, the interplay between digital evidence, forensic findings, and traditional investigative work will likely determine whether charges can be substantiated and guilt proven beyond reasonable doubt.
