Delhi: Family’s two-year struggle for justice exposes lapses in probe into son’s death

Delhi: Sushila Malik clips her family’s clothes one by one to the terrace line, the pegs snapping in a rhythm that is hurried yet steady. When she finishes hanging the last piece, she pauses briefly before walking back to the terrace gate — another day, another routine repeated without thought.

This ritual, she says, keeps her occupied but does not bring her peace. “Ab jab beta hi chala gaya hai, humare zindagi ka maksad hi chala gaya hai (When our son is gone, what is the purpose of our lives?),” she says softly, holding back tears. Even the mention of her son, Manuj, is enough to break her composure.

For over two years since his death, Sushila and her husband, Manbir Malik, have been running from one office to another, seeking to be heard. They say their appeals to the police to register an FIR went unanswered for months. “We knocked on every door, but no one listened,” says Manbir.

After multiple complaints and finally a petition to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), the FIR was eventually registered on March 19 this year — more than two years after the incident.

Long fight for justice

In the FIR, Manbir has alleged that his son was kidnapped, tortured and murdered by five individuals — Saksham Goswami, Parikshit, Punit Pandit, Gagan, and one unidentified accomplice — and that the body was dumped in the river to conceal the crime.

Manuj, whom his father describes as “bright and obedient”, had left their Rohini flat at 8:30 pm on June 11, 2023, to collect stationery from Saksham. “He never returned. Our calls and messages went unanswered through the night. The following morning, a resident, Master Mukesh, informed us that a body had been found at the Yamuna riverbank near Palla Gaon,” the complaint states.

Also read: Delhi: PWD plans to hand over south and north Delhi flyovers, road stretches to Indian Oil for maintenance

When Malik reached the site, he identified the body as his son’s. The FIR records that Manuj was wearing only his underwear, pulled down to the ankles, and his upper clothing was missing. He had facial wounds, leg injuries and multiple bruises. “It was evident this was no accident,” the complaint reads. “My son was killed and then thrown into the river.”

A post-mortem conducted on June 13, 2023, at Maulana Azad Medical College concluded that the cause of death was “asphyxia due to antemortem drowning”. However, Manbir insists that his son could not swim and would not have entered the river voluntarily. The injuries, he argues, point to an assault before death.

Police detained the five suspects by the afternoon of June 12, following PCR calls made by Gagan at 5:25 am and by Punit Pandit at 7 am. Yet, despite the detentions, no charges were filed. The accused reportedly told police that they had gone for a swim but had carried no change of clothes, and none of their garments were wet. Malik says this inconsistency exposes the falsity of their statements.

He further alleges that his son’s death was planned because he had refused to join what he describes as an “illegal syndicate” run by Saksham and his brother. “Manuj had told us that Saksham’s elder brother, who is an IT expert, was hacking university platforms and leaking exam papers. They wanted him to help them recruit students. When he refused and warned them he would report the matter, an argument broke out,” Malik claims.

Since June 2023, Malik has filed multiple complaints with the Alipur Police, the Police Commissioner, the DCP Outer North, and senior Delhi Police officials. However, there has been little progress in the case. The FIR, registered only in March 2025, lists offences under Sections 365 (kidnapping), 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder), and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code.

‘Bias, conflicting evidence’

The family alleges that the investigation was influenced by connections between the accused and members of the police. “One of the accused has a relative in the Delhi Police who interfered in the probe and tried to destroy evidence,” their complaint states.

The post-mortem report cited asphyxia due to drowning. While the body was recovered from the Yamuna bank at Bakhtawarpur, the water found inside the sternum did not match that of the river. Forensic expert Ankita Roy Chowdhury says the findings suggest possible inconsistencies. “Normally, diatoms — a type of algae — are found in the lungs or sternum of drowning victims. In this case, none were detected, indicating the body may have been placed in water after death,” she says.

The report also noted abrasions on the nose, scalp congestion, and contusions on the head — injuries that may have been caused by blunt force impact. “The brain tissue was swollen, showing flattening of the gyri and sulci,” the report stated.

The family says call records show the accused were in Rohini around 11 pm that night. They allegedly told police they had gone to collect their new car and buy alcohol. However, the medical report found no trace of alcohol in Manuj’s body. The car, which the accused retrieved that night, was returned to them on July 15, 2023 — nearly a month later.

There were also inconsistencies in the time of death. “The PCR call was made at 5.23 am, but the accused said Manuj died at 6 am. The post-mortem indicated that death had occurred 24–36 hours earlier,” says Malik.

Nearly two and a half years later, the family continues to allege inaction and bias. “Humara vishwas hi chala gaya hai Delhi Police se. Yeh humari kya hi madad karenge (We have lost faith in the Delhi Police. They will not help us),” says the 60-year-old father. Their daughter, he adds, is now their only solace.

NHRC findings

The NHRC received the complaint in August 2023. Following this, a team from its Investigation Division carried out a spot enquiry between April 21 and 25, 2025.

“Upon review of the report, it appears prima facie that there has been an inordinate delay in registering the FIR and in collecting vital evidence,” the NHRC observed. It noted several lapses — the failure to register an FIR despite allegations of abduction and murder; the absence of expert opinion on autopsy findings; failure to examine witnesses; and the lack of investigation into motive. It also pointed to the 21-month delay before the FIR was finally registered under less severe sections of the IPC.

In June 2025, the NHRC enquiry team examined two of the three doctors who conducted the post-mortem to clarify the absence of diatoms. Dr Amandeep Kaur of LNJP Hospital and Dr Shashank Tyagi of Safdarjung Hospital said that while diatoms support a diagnosis of drowning, their absence does not rule it out, as factors like rapid death or “dry drowning” can yield false negatives.

The Commission, however, found that the delay in registering the FIR and the failure to apply the appropriate sections indicated serious procedural lapses. It directed the Delhi Police Commissioner, Satish Golcha, to provide reasons for the delay and submit a report within four weeks. That deadline has since passed.

The NHRC is now considering whether to recommend a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) inquiry into the case.