A letter-petition has been submitted to the Supreme Court seeking a court-monitored probe into unresolved VIP allegations in the Ankita Bhandari murder case, focusing on evidence gaps, crime scene demolition, and accountability beyond the convicted accused.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: A letter-petition has been addressed to the Supreme Court, invoking its epistolary jurisdiction under Article 32 along with Article 142, and calling for judicial oversight of a further investigation into lingering constitutional concerns connected with the Ankita Bhandari murder case, notwithstanding the completion of the trial and conviction of the accused.
The letter, submitted by Advocate Hitendra D. Gandhi, makes it clear that it does not challenge the verdict, nor does it seek a retrial or reassessment of evidence already adjudicated. Instead, it draws the Court’s attention to unresolved aspects of the case, including allegations of a concealed “VIP / extra-service” channel, possible tampering or loss of electronic evidence, the early demolition of the resort premises, and the absence of accountability beyond those already convicted.
Background: Ankita Bhandari Case
Ankita Bhandari, a young employee working at a privately run resort in Uttarakhand, disappeared in September 2022. Her body was later recovered, sparking widespread public anger and concern. From the outset, the case drew national attention due to allegations that she was being coerced at her workplace to provide so-called “extra services” to an unidentified “VIP,” raising serious questions about exploitation, power imbalance, and institutional complicity.
In May 2025, a trial court convicted three accused, sentencing them to life imprisonment. While the convictions were welcomed, the petition argues that criminal punishment alone cannot operate as constitutional closure when unresolved issues of power, coercion, and institutional failure remain on record.
What Petition Sought?
According to the petitioner, the Ankita Bhandari case has always involved more than a murder allegation. From its earliest stages, the matter was accompanied by allegations pointing to coercive conditions at the workplace, misuse of authority, exploitative demands made upon the victim, and the possible protection of unidentified individuals wielding influence.
The plea stresses that while the criminal justice system punished the visible perpetrators, it failed to lawfully identify or conclusively exclude the alleged “VIP” referenced in communications that formed part of the trial record.
Terming this gap a constitutional failure, the petition contends that:
- Article 14 (Equality before Law) is violated when accountability stops at a “convenient boundary of influence.”
- Article 21 (Right to Life and Dignity) is compromised when truth is sacrificed for procedural finality.
It argues that silence on the “VIP” aspect breeds rumours, erodes public trust, and creates a dangerous perception that criminal liability can be negotiated through power or proximity.
A major focus of the plea is evidence integrity. It highlights that electronic devices seized during the investigation were reportedly rendered unusable, with authorities citing technical limitations, but without a clear explanation. The plea further notes the absence of transparent information on the chain of custody, forensic protocols followed, or efforts made to retrieve or reconstruct digital data.
In addition, it highlights that the resort premises were razed shortly after the incident, allegedly without any documented process confirming that the site had been fully forensically examined or preserved.
The petition seeks a dedicated audit into:
- Who ordered the demolition
- Whether evidence was secured beforehand
- Whether offences relating to the destruction or disappearance of evidence were investigated against officials or facilitators
It notes that Section 201 IPC convictions in the trial itself establish that evidence concealment was judicially recognised in the case.
Crucially, the petitioner relies on recent executive actions to argue that the matter cannot be treated as closed.
According to the plea:
- In January 2026, Uttarakhand constituted a fresh Special Investigation Team (SIT).
- A resurfaced audio clip linked to VIP allegations is under examination.
- The State reportedly approved a CBI probe.
- A fresh FIR related to the alleged VIP has been registered in Dehradun.
These steps, the petition argues, demonstrate that even the executive acknowledges unresolved aspects of the case.
The representation also seeks immediate witness and whistleblower protection, citing apprehensions expressed by individuals who have spoken about the revived VIP angle, including Ms. Urmila Sonawar and Ankita Bhandari’s parents.
It stresses that protection is a safeguard of process, not an endorsement of credibility, and is essential to ensure free and fearless testimony.
ALSO READ: Ankita Bhandari Murder Case: Court Convicts Ex-BJP Minister’s Son Pulkit Arya & 2 Others
Reliefs Sought From the Supreme Court
Among the key reliefs prayed for are:
- A court-monitored further investigation by the CBI or an independent SIT from outside local influence
- Strict evidence preservation directions
- A forensic audit of digital material
- A separate probe into demolition and evidence destruction
- Milestone-based reporting to the Supreme Court
The petition emphasises that its scope is narrowly tailored and constitutionally focused.
Concluding, the petitioner argues that the objective is not to undo the conviction, but to prevent what it calls “punishment without truth.”
The plea urges the Supreme Court, as the guardian of constitutional morality and public faith in the rule of law, to ensure that crimes against women do not result in partial accountability, where visible offenders are punished while shadowed beneficiaries remain untouched.
The letter-petition has requested that the matter be placed before the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders.
Click Here to Read More Reports On Ankita Bhandari Murder Case