Unanswered questions in Army officer, fiancee’s alleged custodial abuse in Odisha

The Odisha Police’s handling of a high-profile sexual assault case involving a woman and her Army officer fiancé has sparked widespread outrage, as serious lapses and inconsistencies in the investigation come to light.
A month after the alleged assault, the case, now under the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), faces mounting public criticism for its opaque procedures and questionable decisions.
Sources familiar with the development in the case have flagged critical questions that remain unanswered till now:
Omission of key accused
A significant point of contention is the absence of Sub-Inspector (SI) Prasant Maharana from the list of accused. Maharana, accused in the Army officer’s complaint of arresting the officer and sexually assaulting the woman, has not been formally implicated by the CID. His exclusion from the investigation has fuelled suspicions of a potential cover-up to protect police personnel.
Discrepancy in number of accused officers
The FIR filed by the Army officer named seven police officers, but the CID has only taken action against five. This discrepancy raises concerns about the thoroughness of the investigation — why have two officers been left out, and on what basis was this decision made?
Lack of standard identification procedures
A Test Identification Parade (TI Parade), essential for the complainants to confirm the identity of the accused, was not conducted by the CID. Instead, they proceeded with polygraph tests on unidentified officers. Without the TI Parade, it is uncertain whether the right individuals are under investigation, further undermining confidence in the probe.
Arrest of road rage suspects
The Army officer’s complaint also detailed a road rage incident involving 10-12 individuals. While seven arrests have been made, the absence of a TI Parade leaves it unclear whether the correct individuals were apprehended, or if some of the perpetrators are still at large.
Unverified victim statements
Despite giving statements to the CID on September 22 and 23, both the woman and the Army officer have not been shown their statements for verification. This procedural lapse casts doubt on the accuracy of their testimonies, with fears that their accounts could have been altered or misrepresented.
Refusal to lodge new complaint
The woman’s separate complaint regarding an incident on September 15 has been outrightly dismissed by the CID, with no FIR being lodged. The CID’s refusal to entertain this complaint raises questions about impartiality and bias in the investigation.
Suspicious destruction of evidence
In a suspicious turn of events, a ‘Hawan’ (religious ritual) was conducted at the Bharatpur Police Station on September 23, followed by renovations to the room where the woman was allegedly assaulted. This sequence of events has raised fears of evidence tampering, further complicating the search for justice.
Inmate identification procedure bypassed
Although the Army officer identified a fellow inmate in a video, no formal identification procedure has been conducted. This irregularity leaves questions about the integrity of the verification process.
Leaked CCTV footage
Another unsettling aspect of the investigation involves leaked CCTV footage. While the hard drive from the restaurant where the incident occurred was seized, videos from Sum and Capital hospitals have surfaced online. How these sensitive videos were leaked remains a mystery, casting doubt on the security and integrity of the investigation’s evidence management.
The Army had raised concerns with the Odisha government following the September 15 assault, which occurred after the couple was waylaid by miscreants in Bhubaneswar on September 14. The case was later transferred to the CID.
The woman, who was also arrested, was granted bail by the Orissa High Court. Recounting her ordeal, she told the media about the brutal treatment she endured at the hands of the police, including repeated physical assaults and sexual harassment.
However, over a month after the incident, unresolved questions in the case continue to cast a shadow over the credibility of the police and CID’s probe.