Police Flag Media Leaks in Dharmasthala Skeleton Case

Mangaluru: In the ongoing investigation into the alleged disposal of human remains near Dharmasthala, the Dakshina Kannada police have expressed concern that media disclosures made by the legal team representing the complainant-witness have compromised efforts to protect his identity.

In a press statement from the Dakshina Kannada district police, the police said that while a request was submitted for witness protection, the advocate representing the witness had shared sensitive details through press releases. Though the advocate reportedly clarified that this was done at the direction of the complainant, police stated that the extent of information disclosed made it impossible to guarantee anonymity, and that further inquiry into the protection request is pending.

Police also cited that under Rule 7 of the Witness Protection Scheme, 2018, protective measures require the consent and cooperation of the witness. "Despite email communication on July 10, no information on the witness’s location has been shared," the statement said. The Deputy SP has submitted a report stating that witness protection cannot proceed without this information.

The investigation officers have recently received information that a petition related to the matter has already been filed before the Supreme Court. However, this information has not been brought to the attention of the investigating officers by the witness-complainant or their legal representatives.

"There is confidential intelligence from local sources suggesting that once the exhumation process is completed, there is a possibility that the witness-complainant may abscond. It is being speculated that this is the reason behind the urgency being shown in proceeding with the exhumation without following due investigative procedures. This concern has also been communicated to the lawyers representing the witness," it added.

The investigation officers have submitted a report to the Hon’ble Court seeking permission to conduct a brain mapping, fingerprinting, and narco-analysis test on the witness-complainant, subject to his consent.

"When the investigating officer determines that the exhumation process is appropriate at a particular stage of the investigation, the process will be carried out by following the proper legal procedures," the police said.

Responding sharply, advocates representing the complainant, expressed disappointment with the police's statements and alleged delays. “The complainant has not sought anonymity to avoid scrutiny. His decision to release a redacted complaint was aimed at public awareness and safety,” their statement said.

They also objected to the investigating officer’s alleged attempt to breach attorney-client privilege by questioning whether the witness had authorized the release of the complaint.

The lawyers dismissed claims that the witness was unreachable. “On July 14, police recorded his statement in Mangaluru, and his address near Dharmasthala was emailed on July 13,” they stated.

According to them, the complainant, who has expressed fear for his safety, had voluntarily handed over human remains on July 11. Despite this, no further site visit has occurred. “He believes each recovery reduces the risk to his life,” the statement added, urging authorities to treat him not as an adversary, but as someone trying to correct a historic wrong.