After Preeti Rathi’s family requested that the case be transferred to the Crime Branch, the cops tracked down Ankur Panwar and proved that he was lying about his alibi
Crime Branch cops suspected Ankur Panwar might be the real killer when they saw the burn injuries on his face and hands
ADVERTISEMENT
If Preeti Rathi’s family and the Mumbai Crime Branch had not taken action, Pawan Gahlan (27) might have had to spend a lot more time in prison for a crime that he never committed. It was the Bandra GRP that had arrested Pawan, but the Mumbai Crime Branch eventually proved that the real killer was not him, but Ankur Panwar.
The GRP, which had falsely accused Pawan of flinging acid on Preeti, claimed that the victim had named him in her dying declaration. However, she had also named two others, including the real killer, Ankur, who was never investigated properly by the Bandra GRP.
In August 2013, Preeti Rathi’s family filed an application in court requesting that the investigation should be handed over to the Mumbai Crime Branch instead. In their application, the Rathi family claimed that Pawan had nothing to do with their daughter’s murder. In November 2013, the case got transferred to the Crime Branch and a Special Investigations Team (SIT) was formed on the instructions of the court.
SIT probe begins
The SIT decided to scan all three suspects named by Preeti, all of whom used to stay in the same society as Preeti, at the Bhakra Bias Management Board Colony in Narela, New Delhi. The first suspect was Pawan, whom the Rathis thought was innocent. The second suspect was the boyfriend of Preeti’s friend. Preeti had suspected him since she had once informed her friend’s family about him.
Also Read: Preeti Rathi's death was an honour killing, alleges Ankur Panwar
“We questioned the second suspect but after thorough interrogations, he turned out to be innocent. The family claimed that the third suspect Ankur was in Haridwar, where he was working in a three-star hotel. Without raising any suspicion in front of the family, we just asked them to inform us when he would return to the city and stationed ourselves at Maharashtra Sadan in Delhi,” said Inspector Ashok Khot, who was in the SIT.
In the first week of January 2014, Ankur visited his hometown to collect some certificates. On the second day of his visit, Ankur’s mother took him to Maharashtra Sadan on the instructions of the SIT officials.
Inspector Vijay Dhamal, another officer who was in the SIT, told mid-day, “On questioning him, Ankur told us that on the day of the acid attack, he was in Haridwar in the first half of the day, and then went to Rajasthan to attend a family function. He claimed he had gone to Haridwar to submit his CV for a job at Hotel Residency.”
Suspicion
But the cops suspected Ankur was not telling the truth because he had some burn injuries on his hands and face, which he had tried to cover up. The police suspected these burns might have been sustained during the acid attack.
Read Story: Preeti Rathi acid attack case: Timeline of events
“He covered injuries on his face with a cap and also tried to cover the injuries on hand with tattoos,” said Dhamal.
The SIT officials left for Haridwar to verify Ankur’s claims, but on speaking to the staff at Hotel Residency, they learnt that he had lied about his visit there. They found the third important clue while browsing through cell tower locations. The cops found a number that was registered in Ankur’s name and traced its location to prove that Ankur had carried the same SIM card while he followed Preeti from Delhi to Bandra Terminus.
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
