Court orders further probe into mysterious death of Nishat youth

Srinagar, Mar 3: A court here has ordered further investigation into the mysterious death of a 22-year-old youth from Nishat as it noted serious deficiencies and material contradictions in the earlier probe by police.

The court of Special Judge NDPS Cases Srinagar, Vinor Kumar ordered the SSP Srinagar to ensure that the probe is conducted within 60 days by an officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police. The direction came in response to a protest plea by Nazir Ahmad Hafiz, the father of the deceased youth, Ruman Nazir.

The police had filed the FIR (15/2025) with police station Nishat Srinagar on the directions of Chief Judicial Magistrate, following a complaint by Hafiz. Subsequently, police filed a charge-sheet for the offences under relevant sections of the NDPS Act against Ruman and two other accused, attributing the cause of death to a drug overdose.

In his protest plea, Hafiz through his counsel advocate Abrar Ahmad Bhat contended that he was unimpressed by the police probe alleging the investigation was incomplete, biased and mechanical, and had ignored crucial material suggesting foul play.

The plea underscores that the body of the deceased was recovered on October 1, 2024, at the instance of the accused persons, three days after he went missing on September 28. The accused had initially claimed they had dropped the deceased near Nishat to meet his girlfriend and had no knowledge of his whereabouts, but it was upon sustained questioning which led to the recovery of Ruman’s body, it said. The counsel submitted that the Investigating Officer (IO) had not investigated whether the alleged drug was administered voluntarily or forcibly, nor whether it was supplied or injected by the accused persons.

While the counsel argued that the possibility of homicide under the garb of overdose has been completely ignored, he said: “The IO has heavily relied upon the Forensic Science Laboratory report to claim that heroin was detected from the viscera of the deceased, treating it as conclusive proof of death due to drug overdose. However, the FSL report merely indicates the presence of the substance and is not conclusive proof that the death occurred solely due to overdose or that the drug was self-administered, the counsel said.

During the arguments, one of the significant lapses highlighted was the failure of the IO to record statements of key family members, including the deceased’s mother and brother, under Section 180 of the BNSS. The complainant had alleged that on the day of his disappearance, the deceased made a WhatsApp call to his mother stating that the accused had taken away his money near Gani Baker’s shop in Nishat and that a quarrel had ensued.

The counsel also identified the alleged trip to Jammu for procurement of heroin as a “major gap”. The charge sheet relied primarily on the statements of the accused that they travelled to Jammu, procured heroin from an unknown individual and later consumed it, leading to overdose. Following the arguments by the prosecution and the counsel, the court noted that no independent corroboration such as toll records, CCTV footage, hotel records, fuel receipts or tower location data had been collected to verify the claim regarding procuring of heroin.

As the court noted that the deficiencies were not minor or technical but went to the root of the matter, it allowed the protest petition and directed for further probe. The court directed to file fortnightly progress reports detailing steps taken, evidence collected and witnesses examined.

While the court directed to file supplementary report or supplementary charge sheet upon completion of further investigation, it ordered to list the case after sixty days for consideration of the supplementary report and progress made.