A Delhi court has raised serious concerns regarding the Gurugram Police’s handling and cremation of Yuvraj Singh Manchanda, a real estate sales professional. During a hearing on Saturday, the court scrutinized the police’s actions, noting that they failed to adhere to basic legal protocols. This oversight has reportedly denied Manchanda’s family their rights to conduct his last rites properly.
“Isn’t it the norm to inform the nearest executive magistrate of the Sub-divisional magistrate on the second day from recovery itself regarding inquest proceedings for the unidentified body? Why wasn’t it carried out,” the court asked the Gurugram police officer present during the proceedings. The court further questioned the failure to upload details of the unidentified body on ZIPNET, the police network used by Delhi, Haryana and other northern states to share information on missing persons and unidentified bodies. “Do you not upload details of an unidentified body on ZIPNET in cases of murder or otherwise? Isn’t that the procedure followed by Gurugram Police?” the judge asked.
Because the accused allegedly used his phone to send messages to relatives, creating the impression that he was alive, delhi Police has said Manchanda’s family did not approach it until September 11. The family’s plea alleges that the Badshahpur police cremated Manchanda’s body as that of an unidentified person on September 14, despite an FIR over his disappearance having been registered at Lajpat Nagar police station three days earlier.
Prasad alleged that the police actions amounted to destruction of evidence and were intended to “save the culprits”, arguing that the court had the ancillary powers to issue directions over the handling of the deceased’s body. The court had on Thursday observed that the Gurugram Police had “botched up” the case and carried out a “complete hotch potch” in handling Manchanda’s body.
Court Criticizes Police Officer’s Lack of Response
In a recent court session, a judge criticized a police officer from the Badshahpur police station in Gurugram for failing to provide satisfactory answers to inquiries. The judge highlighted the emotional toll on a complainant who not only had to cremate her brother, but also faced the loss of her family’s right to conduct his last rites properly. The judge’s remarks underscored the severity of the situation, stating, “The complainant not only lost her brother by cremating his (Manchanda’s) body, you snatched away her family’s right to dutifully carry out his last rites.”
