Investigators probing an alleged murder in New Delhi have uncovered fresh digital evidence that could reshape the direction of their inquiry. Police are now scrutinising alleged Snapchat conversations and what they characterise as cryptic exchanges between the two accused, though the authenticity of these purported messages remains unverified at this stage. The digital footprint could prove instrumental in reconstructing the sequence of events following the victim's death and clarifying whether the accused attempted to obstruct justice or mislead the investigation.
At the centre of the probe is an alleged exchange on Snapchat between accused Siya Goyal and a friend, in which she supposedly requested the friend's Aadhaar card to arrange flight bookings. The phrasing investigators have highlighted is particularly striking: "Send me your Aadhaar card to book tickets for a wedding that is never going to happen." This cryptic message has drawn police attention because they suspect it may have been crafted deliberately to suggest that wedding preparations were progressing normally, thereby deflecting suspicion from the alleged crime.
Police believe the apparent attempt to book tickets using someone else's identity documents served a strategic purpose in the broader conspiracy. By maintaining the facade of wedding arrangements, investigators argue, the accused may have sought to project an image of normalcy while concealing evidence of the alleged murder. This aspect of the investigation highlights how modern digital communications, even those designed to be ephemeral like Snapchat messages, can become critical evidence when they contain references to significant events or suspicious activity.
Compounding this digital evidence, forensic examination of deleted mobile phone data has revealed what investigators describe as coded communications between Siya Goyal and co-accused Chetan Chaudhary. These exchanges allegedly occurred after the victim's death and are believed to contain deliberately obscured language designed to prevent third parties or authorities from understanding their meaning. Police suspect these coded messages contained details related to the alleged conspiracy, with the accused attempting to discuss their actions in veiled language to avoid detection.
According to police allegations, Siya Goyal, who was engaged to victim Ketan Agarwal, and Chetan Chaudhary are suspected of murdering him before attempting to destroy evidence and mislead the investigation. The digital evidence being examined is intended to establish the motive behind the alleged crime and clarify the respective roles each accused played in the incident and its aftermath. Investigating Officer Manoj Pawar has informed the court that additional evidence gathered at the scene includes a panchnama document relating to a location where Siya allegedly tore Ketan's passport, and clothing seized from the accused as part of the forensic examination.
During a court hearing on custody matters, the prosecution argued that further police custody was necessary to question both accused together, interpret the alleged coded conversations, establish motive, and determine the division of responsibility between them. However, a local court granted the accused only 14 days of judicial custody, declining the police request for an additional three days of custodial interrogation. This decision has constrained the investigating agency's ability to conduct the prolonged questioning they deemed essential for progress.
The issue of conducting narco analysis on the accused also emerged during court proceedings. This controversial forensic technique, which involves administering substances to lower inhibitions and potentially increase candour during questioning, has specific legal limitations in India. The court observed that such testing cannot proceed without explicit consent from the accused. Since both Siya Goyal and Chetan Chaudhary declined to participate in the procedure, the court did not grant permission for the test. Notably, the prosecution itself indicated that it did not consider narco analysis necessary at the current investigative stage.
For regional observers and those following high-profile criminal cases in South Asia, this investigation illustrates how contemporary law enforcement agencies must navigate the intersection of traditional investigative methods and digital evidence analysis. The reliance on Snapchat conversations, Aadhaar card requests, and deleted phone data demonstrates how digital footprints can inadvertently expose criminal planning or post-crime cover-up attempts. As criminal networks become increasingly sophisticated in their use of coded language and ephemeral messaging platforms, investigators must develop corresponding expertise in decrypting such communications.
The case also reflects broader challenges within the Indian criminal justice system regarding the balance between investigative authority and individual rights. The court's reluctance to extend custodial interrogation and its insistence on consent for narco analysis reflects judicial safeguards against coercive practices, even as these protections may slow investigative momentum. This tension between efficiency and due process is particularly acute in cases involving serious allegations, where both public interest in swift resolution and fundamental rights protection demand careful navigation.
The investigation remains ongoing as police continue to verify the authenticity and evidentiary value of the digital communications. The outcome of this probe may establish important precedents for how Indian courts treat digital evidence from messaging platforms in criminal cases. For Malaysia and other Southeast Asian nations with similar legal frameworks and increasing digitalisation, the methodologies employed in this investigation offer insights into emerging investigative techniques and the judicial considerations surrounding their admissibility. As technology continues to evolve, the capacity of investigators to extract meaningful evidence from digital communications while maintaining rigorous standards of authentication will remain essential to effective criminal justice outcomes.
