Investigators probing the alleged murder of Ketan Agarwal in New Delhi have uncovered fresh digital evidence, including what police describe as coded messaging between the two accused persons, though authorities stress that the authenticity of these communications remains unverified. The emergence of this alleged Snapchat conversation and encrypted exchanges represents a significant development in the ongoing investigation, potentially offering insights into actions taken following the victim's death and any possible attempts to obstruct the probe.
According to law enforcement sources, a Snapchat exchange has surfaced between one of the accused, Siya Goyal, and an acquaintance. In the alleged conversation, Siya reportedly requested that her friend provide a copy of her Aadhaar identification document, ostensibly to facilitate flight bookings. The phrasing used—specifically the reference to "a wedding that is never going to happen"—has caught investigators' attention as potentially significant to the case.
Detectives are scrutinising whether the purported ticket reservation scheme was designed to create a facade of normalcy and wedding preparations continuing despite the alleged crime. This interpretation suggests that investigators suspect deliberate efforts were made to mislead the investigation by maintaining appearances of ordinary activity. The theory under examination is whether such false-flag activities formed part of a broader strategy to deflect suspicion away from the accused and their alleged involvement in Agarwal's death.
Forensic examination of deleted mobile phone data has revealed what investigators characterise as coded communications between Siya Goyal and the second accused, Chetan Chaudhary, exchanged after Ketan Agarwal's alleged death. Police believe these exchanges were intentionally designed with coded language to conceal details pertaining to the alleged conspiracy. The nature and content of these encrypted messages have become central to the investigation's narrative, as authorities attempt to establish a timeline and reconstruct events surrounding the alleged crime.
The investigation alleges that Siya Goyal, who was betrothed to the deceased Ketan Agarwal, and Chetan Chaudhary jointly perpetrated the alleged murder before engaging in coordinated efforts to destroy evidence and provide misleading statements to investigators. This narrative of conspiracy and cover-up has shaped how law enforcement has been pursuing the case, with each piece of digital evidence potentially serving to corroborate or challenge the prosecution's theory.
A local court in New Delhi has remanded both accused to fourteen days of judicial custody while rejecting the police's application for an additional three days of custodial interrogation. The investigating agency had contended that extended access to the two accused was essential to enable their joint questioning, facilitate the decryption and analysis of the alleged coded communications, establish clear motive for the alleged crime, and definitively determine the individual roles each accused played in the incident.
Investigating Officer Manoj Pawar presented evidence before the court detailing a formal scene examination that had been conducted at a location where Siya was suspected of destroying Ketan's passport documentation. As part of this investigative process, officers seized clothing belonging to Siya that will be subjected to forensic testing. The officer also informed the court that an examination of Siya's secondary mobile device had uncovered what law enforcement characterises as coded conversations, adding another layer to the digital evidence collection.
The issue of narco analysis—a controversial investigative technique involving the administration of drugs to allegedly lower a subject's inhibitions—also became a matter before the court. Narco analysis, though used by Indian law enforcement in certain cases, is highly contentious from both legal and ethical standpoints. The court determined that such a procedure cannot be legally conducted without explicit written consent from the person undergoing it. Since both Siya Goyal and Chetan Chaudhary declined to provide their consent for the procedure, the court declined to grant permission for its application in this case.
The prosecution further communicated to the court that it did not regard narco analysis as a necessary investigative step at the current stage of the inquiry. This position suggests that law enforcement believes sufficient progress can be made through conventional investigation techniques, including continued examination of digital evidence, forensic analysis of physical materials, and further questioning within the constraints of judicial custody limits.
The reliance on digital communications in high-profile Indian criminal investigations has increased substantially in recent years, reflecting broader global trends in forensic investigation. The alleged coded messaging and the Snapchat exchange in this case exemplify how modern investigations increasingly turn to electronic evidence as investigators seek to establish guilt or innocence. The challenge facing authorities remains the verification of authenticity and the meaningful interpretation of potentially obfuscated communications, particularly when dealing with encrypted or deleted messages that must be reconstructed through digital forensics.
For Malaysian observers and legal professionals, this case offers instructive parallels regarding evidentiary standards in Commonwealth jurisdictions, where Indian jurisprudence operates within frameworks comparable to Malaysia's own legal system. The court's cautious approach to accepting digital evidence and its rejection of investigative techniques lacking proper consent reflects principles also embedded in Malaysian criminal procedure. The investigation continues, with authorities expected to pursue additional lines of inquiry while working within the parameters established by the court's custody orders.
