The investigation into the death of 26-year-old Ketan Agarwal has reached a critical juncture as Pune Rural Police prepare to reconstruct events at Lohagad Fort, a scenic trekking destination in Maharashtra's Sahyadri range. The recreation exercise, scheduled for an undisclosed date due to security considerations, represents a turning point in a case that initially appeared to be a tragic accident but has since transformed into a suspected homicide inquiry involving two accused individuals.
The primary focus of the reconstruction will be to establish a clear timeline of movements and actions at the fort location. Investigators plan to trace the paths followed by Ketan, accused Siya Goyal, and her alleged associate Chetan Babulal Chaudhary across the terrain, paying particular attention to identifying the exact location from which Ketan was allegedly pushed and calculating the trajectory and distance of his fall into the ravine below. These details will be crucial in either substantiating or undermining the prosecution's theory of events.
A dummy body will feature prominently in the reconstruction exercise, enabling forensic specialists and investigating officers to test various scenarios and assess the physical mechanics of how the alleged incident could have occurred. Since no eyewitnesses observed the fatal moment, investigators are heavily dependent on circumstantial evidence to build their case, making the physical reconstruction an invaluable investigative tool. The exercise will help determine whether the trajectory, fall distance, and resulting injuries are consistent with the narrative authorities have constructed based on interrogations and preliminary findings.
To date, investigators have recorded statements from seven individuals connected to the case. Among them is Neeraj, an employee at Chetan's dry fruit business, who was detained and questioned intensively for over 24 hours. Although police have not established any direct link between Neeraj and the alleged crime, his statement has acquired significance in the investigation. According to officers, Neeraj revealed that Chetan had borrowed his mobile phone on the day of the incident after allegedly abandoning his own device, using the borrowed phone to maintain contact with Siya throughout the day.
The mobile phone detail has opened a new investigative avenue. Police are now considering designating Neeraj as a key prosecution witness, given his knowledge of Chetan's movements and communications on the fateful day. This evidence could prove instrumental in establishing a timeline of coordination between the two accused individuals, particularly if messages or calls between them can be retrieved and analysed. The fact that Chetan allegedly deliberately left his own phone behind suggests a degree of premeditation that investigators believe strengthens their murder hypothesis.
According to the police narrative, Siya's motivations centred on her marriage to Ketan, whom she allegedly viewed as overbearing and controlling due to his family's wealth and influence. Police claim Siya stated that Ketan had asserted his family's power and financial resources, making it impossible for her to leave the marriage. This alleged motive forms the psychological basis for investigators' theory that she sought to escape the union through lethal means, with Chetan becoming her willing accomplice in the plan.
The pattern of alleged attempts to bring Ketan to Lohagad Fort over several weeks appears deliberate in the police's assessment. The couple first visited on May 31, establishing familiarity with the location. When Siya requested another visit on June 4, Ketan's mother refused permission, temporarily thwarting what police believe was an initial murder attempt. During a subsequent visit on June 14, investigators allege Siya made a first attempt to push Ketan off a cliff, only for him to save himself by grasping a bush. When he confronted her about the act, she allegedly claimed she had seen a snake and pushed him to protect him from danger—a story authorities view as an unconvincing cover.
The final visit to Lohagad Fort on June 18 allegedly resulted in Ketan's death. Investigators maintain that Siya and Chetan successfully pushed the young man from the cliff during this occasion, resulting in the fatal fall that claimed his life. The case, which was initially classified as an accidental trekking fatality, underwent a dramatic reorientation when evidence emerged suggesting foul play.
Siya's mother has contested the police version of events, offering an alternative account that frames Ketan rather than Siya as the driving force behind the trekking expeditions. She asserts that Ketan suggested the trips and that Ketan's own mother encouraged Siya to participate in the outings, contradicting the police theory that Siya repeatedly insisted on visiting the dangerous location. This defence narrative attempts to undermine the prosecution's argument that Siya had orchestrated multiple visits to create an opportunity for murder.
The alleged romantic relationship between Siya and Chetan emerged as a complicating factor in the investigation. Police claim the two began a relationship in November 2025, during the period when wedding preparations for Siya and Ketan were actively underway. The affair purportedly provided both motive and opportunity, with Chetan emerging as Siya's potential partner for life should she successfully exit her marriage to Ketan. Siya operated a bakery business, Chetan ran a dry fruit enterprise, while Ketan served as Director and Chief Marketing Officer of Success Group, his family's real estate company, indicating he came from a significantly more privileged economic background.
The public statement from Siya's parents has attracted considerable attention and raised questions about family pressures within high-profile criminal cases. They declared that if a court found their daughter guilty, she should face the maximum punishment available under Indian law, and made a striking emotional remark suggesting she should be pushed from the same location where Ketan allegedly fell. These comments, while perhaps intended to demonstrate their sense of justice or moral authority, have become part of the broader narrative surrounding the case and illustrate the intense emotional and social dimensions of murder investigations in India.
As the investigation proceeds toward the crime scene reconstruction, prosecutors are consolidating their evidence and preparing for what promises to be a legally significant phase. The reconstruction will either validate or challenge their working theory, potentially influencing charges and the trajectory of the judicial proceedings. The case exemplifies how circumstantial evidence, mobile phone records, witness statements, and physical reconstruction combine in modern criminal investigations, particularly in cases lacking direct eyewitness testimony.
