A New Delhi murder investigation has taken a new turn with the emergence of digital evidence that police believe may provide crucial insights into the circumstances surrounding Ketan Agarwal's death. Investigators are now scrutinising an alleged Snapchat conversation between one of the accused, Siya Goyal, and a friend, as well as what officials describe as coded exchanges between the two suspects. The authenticity of these digital communications has yet to be formally verified, but authorities view them as potentially significant in understanding the sequence of events following the alleged killing.
The investigation into the case has revealed troubling details about how the accused may have attempted to maintain a façade of normalcy even after the alleged crime. According to police sources, Siya allegedly requested her friend's Aadhaar card identification document to facilitate the booking of airline tickets. The explicit reference in the purported message—"Send me your Aadhaar card to book tickets for a wedding that is never going to happen"—has caught investigators' attention because it suggests an apparent contradiction between stated intentions and actual circumstances.
Law enforcement officials believe this digital exchange may represent a deliberate strategy to create the impression that wedding preparations remained active despite the alleged murder having already occurred. By maintaining outward signs of wedding-related activity, the accused may have intended to obscure their involvement in the crime and misdirect investigators who would be monitoring their behaviour in the immediate aftermath of the incident. This theory forms part of a broader investigative framework examining whether multiple layers of concealment were employed to evade detection.
The forensic examination of mobile phone data that had been deleted has yielded additional evidence of concern to investigators. Both Siya Goyal and her co-accused, Chetan Chaudhary, allegedly exchanged messages that police characterise as intentionally coded or cryptic in nature. Investigators suspect this communication style was deliberately adopted to prevent outsiders, including law enforcement, from understanding the actual substance of their exchanges. The decryption and interpretation of these coded messages has become a central focus of the ongoing inquiry.
According to the charges being investigated, Siya, who was engaged to Ketan Agarwal, allegedly conspired with Chetan Chaudhary to commit the murder. Beyond the act itself, police allege the pair then undertook coordinated efforts to eliminate physical evidence and provide misleading information to investigators attempting to solve the case. This pattern of behaviour—from the alleged crime through subsequent cover-up attempts—suggests a level of planning and coordination that prosecutors view as indicative of premeditation.
The judicial process has placed certain constraints on the investigation's progression. A local court remanded both accused to fourteen days of judicial custody, rejecting the police's request for an additional three days of custodial interrogation. During the custody hearing, investigating officer Manoj Pawar outlined the necessity of further questioning, arguing that direct confrontation between the two accused in police custody would help authorities decode the purported coded communications, establish clear motive, and determine the specific role each individual played in the alleged offence.
Physical evidence gathered during the investigation has complemented the digital findings. At a location where Siya was suspected of destroying Ketan's passport, police conducted a formal panchnama or documented inspection. Her clothing from the relevant period was seized and submitted for forensic analysis. Additionally, examination of a second mobile phone belonging to Siya allegedly revealed further examples of the coded conversational patterns that have become central to prosecutors' understanding of how the accused communicated about sensitive matters.
During court proceedings, the possibility of conducting a narco analysis—a controversial investigative technique involving the administration of substances intended to reduce inhibitions and encourage truthfulness—emerged as a potential avenue for extracting information from the accused. However, narco analysis cannot be legally conducted without the explicit consent of the subject. Both Siya Goyal and Chetan Chaudhary refused to submit to the procedure, and the court declined to mandate it. The prosecution also indicated that it did not view such testing as essential to the case at its current stage.
The investigation continues to develop as authorities work to verify the authenticity and evidentiary value of the alleged digital communications. For Malaysian observers following international criminal cases, this incident underscores the increasingly central role that digital forensics plays in modern murder investigations. In an era when communication leaves persistent digital traces, investigators worldwide have become adept at recovering and analysing data that accused persons may believe they have permanently deleted. This case also illustrates broader challenges facing South Asian law enforcement, where balancing investigative necessity against individual rights protections remains an ongoing tension in judicial systems. As the inquiry progresses, the courts will ultimately determine the admissibility and reliability of the digital evidence that has emerged.
