A businessman was stabbed to death in the early hours of September 5. Three people have been arrested, one of whom has told investigators he was hired to kill, an account the person he names denies. The police have sought custody remand and say they are still examining call records, CCTV and the movements of the accused. At this stage these are allegations and lines of inquiry, not findings, and no one has been charged with, let alone convicted of, the offence.
Kanpur: The Kanpur Police are continuing to investigate the murder of a 60-year-old pharmaceutical trader who was stabbed to death in the early hours of September 5. Three people have been arrested and are in judicial custody, and the police have sought the custody remand of two of them as the investigation proceeds.
The Police Commissioner confirmed the arrests and the status of the inquiry. Nothing has been established against any of the accused, and the allegations set out below are those made in the course of the investigation, which remain to be tested.
What has happened so far
The deceased ran a well-known pharmaceutical business in the city. He was stabbed to death at his premises in the early hours of September 5. Three persons, the deceased’s daughter-in-law, a man alleged to be the assailant, and an associate of that man, have been arrested in connection with the case and are lodged in jail.
According to the police, the man alleged to be the assailant had previously worked at the deceased’s firm and had been let go over allegations of theft. The police have said he has told investigators that he carried out the killing at the instance of the daughter-in-law, claiming she had promised him a sum of money and a job. The daughter-in-law has denied any role in planning the killing. A confession of that kind, made to the police by one accused implicating another, has limited evidentiary value and will have to be tested against other material; it is not, at this stage, proof of anyone’s guilt.
The current stage of the investigation
With court permission, the investigating officer is reported to have questioned two of the arrested persons inside jail. The police have also sought custody remand of those two, which the Commissioner indicated was expected to be granted shortly, after which further questioning would follow.
The police have said they are examining call detail records of several mobile numbers connected to the case over a period spanning the months before and after the murder, and are cross-checking the statements of the accused against available CCTV footage and against the digital and financial trail left by their movements, including a cab journey said to have been taken by the alleged assailant after the killing. These are ordinary investigative steps, and the material they yield will be assessed by the investigating agency and, if a charge-sheet is filed, tested before a court.
Separately, counsel for the daughter-in-law is reported to have raised questions about the handling of her seized phone, pointing to activity on a social-media account after she was taken into custody. That is a matter for the investigation and any subsequent proceedings to address.
The Commissioner is also reported to have dismissed as rumour certain claims circulating about online searches said to have been made by one of the accused, while noting that the examination of digital evidence was continuing. That, too, underscores that a good deal of what is in public circulation about this case is unverified.
A note on what can, and cannot, be said at this stage
Cases of this kind attract intense attention, and the temptation to convert an investigator’s working theory into a settled account of who did what is strong. The law resists that for good reason. An arrest is not a conviction; a police theory is not a finding; and a family member whose name surfaces in the course of an inquiry is not, by that fact, an accused, still less a guilty party. The Allahabad High Court and the Supreme Court have repeatedly cautioned against media coverage that pronounces on guilt while an investigation is under way, precisely because such coverage can prejudice a fair trial and can gravely injure people who may ultimately be found to have done nothing wrong.
For that reason, this report is confined to what is a matter of record: that a murder has occurred, that three persons have been arrested, that one has made an allegation against another which she denies, that custody remand has been sought, and that the investigation is continuing. Who was responsible for the death, and whether anyone beyond those arrested was involved, are questions for the investigating agency to determine and, if it comes to a trial, for a court to decide on evidence. Until then, every person connected with the case is entitled to the presumption of innocence.
Status: Three persons arrested and in judicial custody. Custody remand of two sought. Investigation continuing. Allegations untested; no charge-sheet or trial reported at this stage. All accused are presumed innocent until proven guilty.