Ankita Bhandari murder case: Parents, Congress MPs detained during India Gate protest

Ankita Bhandari’s parents and several Congress MPs were detained during a sit-in protest at Delhi’s India Gate. The protest opposed BJP leader Dushyant Kumar Gautam’s appointment as Sikkim’s next governor. The family and activists wanted the appointment paused while allegations about an alleged VIP connection to Bhandari’s murder were investigated.

The protest began after Gautam was named to the post on Monday. Rahul Gandhi, Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, and other Congress MPs joined on Wednesday. Congress leaders and workers stayed at the site after the two leaders left. The parents were released less than two hours after their detention, according to ANI.

The protest reflects the family’s demand for a CBI inquiry focused on the alleged VIP angle. Uttarakhand’s government had recommended such an investigation in January after Opposition demands. Gautam has denied the allegations, while the police special investigation team earlier said it found no evidence proving an influential leader’s involvement.

Bhandari’s parents opposed Dushyant Kumar Gautam’s appointment because he had been identified by activists and the family as the alleged VIP connected to her murder. They argued that someone facing such allegations should not receive a constitutional position before an investigation established the facts.

The alleged connection came from audio and video clips made public later. Former BJP MLA Suresh Rathore allegedly identified Gautam as the VIP in question. Rathore denied releasing the clips or making remarks against senior party leaders. Gautam, who had led the BJP’s Uttarakhand unit, denied the allegations and challenged social-media posts linking him to the case.

The family sought a CBI investigation focused on the VIP angle. In January, Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhami said the state government had recommended a CBI probe. The parents asked President Droupadi Murmu to delay Gautam’s appointment until that investigation concluded.

In India, a governor is the constitutional head of a state and represents the Union in the state’s formal constitutional structure. Governors perform duties assigned by the Constitution, including giving formal assent to legislation and appointing governments under specified circumstances. This explanation uses established constitutional knowledge; the article does not define the office.

Here, the appointment mattered because Gautam was named as Sikkim’s next governor while allegations linked him to Bhandari’s murder remained disputed. Her parents and activists argued that he should not take the post until those allegations were investigated. They asked President Droupadi Murmu to delay the appointment.

Gautam denied the allegations. The police special investigation team earlier said it found no evidence establishing an influential leader’s involvement. The state government later recommended a CBI probe, so the appointment became part of a wider dispute about investigation, public trust, and constitutional office.

Three people were convicted in Ankita Bhandari’s murder: Pulkit Arya, resort manager Saurabh Bhaskar, and assistant Ankit Gupta. In May 2025, all three were sentenced to life imprisonment. This established criminal responsibility for the murder at trial, separately from the later allegations about an influential VIP.

Bhandari worked as a receptionist at a resort in Rishikesh owned by Pulkit Arya. She disappeared on September 18, 2022. Arya, Bhaskar, and Gupta first filed a missing-person report, then confessed to killing her by pushing her into a canal after an altercation. Her body was recovered from the Chilla Canal six days later.

The convictions did not resolve the family’s separate demand for an investigation into the alleged VIP angle. Bhandari’s parents wanted a CBI probe to examine that issue rather than repeat the investigation into the roles of people already convicted. Gautam has denied any connection to the murder.

The alleged VIP angle arose from evidence and claims that appeared after the murder investigation. WhatsApp messages Bhandari sent to a friend seemed to suggest that the accused men were trying to force her into prostitution. It was alleged that she was killed after refusing to provide “special services” to a VIP.

Later, audio and video clips became public. Former BJP MLA Suresh Rathore allegedly identified Dushyant Kumar Gautam, then a BJP national general secretary, as the VIP. Rathore denied releasing the clips or making remarks against senior party leaders. Gautam denied the allegations and challenged social-media posts linking him to the case.

The police special investigation team reached a different conclusion from the allegations. It earlier stated that it found no evidence establishing an influential leader’s involvement in the murder. The family and activists nevertheless continued to demand a CBI investigation focused on the alleged VIP angle.

Several actions followed the allegations and the murder investigation. The BJP expelled Vinod Arya and his other son Ankit Arya after the case became public. In May 2025, Pulkit Arya, Saurabh Bhaskar, and Ankit Gupta were sentenced to life imprisonment. These actions concerned the convicted or politically connected people in the case, not a finding that Gautam was involved.

Gautam filed a defamation petition in the Delhi High Court against the Congress, the Aam Aadmi Party, and others over social-media posts linking him to the murder. The court directed the Congress and the AAP to remove those posts. In January, Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhami announced that the state had recommended a CBI investigation after Opposition demands.

In June, former BJP MLA Suresh Rathore was arrested for allegedly making statements linking Gautam to the murder. The proposed CBI inquiry was intended to examine the alleged VIP angle. Gautam continued to deny the allegations, while the police team’s earlier findings did not establish influential-leader involvement.

Rule of law separates allegations, investigations, convictions, and public appointments because each involves a different question and decision-maker. An allegation raises an issue for examination. A police finding reports what investigators established. A conviction requires a court’s judgment, while a constitutional appointment follows a separate public process. Treating them as identical can turn claims into assumed guilt.

The Bhandari case shows the distinction clearly. Pulkit Arya, Saurabh Bhaskar, and Ankit Gupta were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. Separately, activists alleged that Gautam was an uninvestigated VIP connection. The special investigation team said it found no evidence establishing an influential leader’s involvement, and Gautam denied the allegations.

The family’s demand for a CBI probe seeks more investigation, not an automatic conviction. The Delhi High Court’s order to remove social-media posts also concerned legal claims, not a ruling on murder guilt. Gautam’s appointment therefore remained a constitutional issue alongside, rather than inside, the criminal case.