Media Release
Mangaluru, July 16: In a sharp response to remarks made earlier in the day by the superintendent of police, Dakshina Kannada district, the lawyers representing the complainant witness in the Dharmasthala mass burials case have issued a press release raising concerns over police conduct, alleging distortion of facts, violation of attorney-client privilege, and delays in the investigation.
‘Witness came forward on his own’
The advocates Dheeraj S J and Ananya Gowda, who now represent the complainant, clarified that the witness had not approached the police at any point. Instead, he had approached lawyers of his own volition, motivated by “fear of God and a deep sense of moral obligation.”
“There was no investigation underway, and no one was searching for the remains,” the release states, accusing the police of repeatedly ignoring this critical context in their public statements.
‘Witness identity not hidden to avoid scrutiny’
The lawyers objected to suggestions by the police that they are under no obligation to extend witness protection since parts of the complaint have already been made public. They clarified that the witness intentionally instructed his lawyers to release a redacted version of the complaint and FIR to ensure public awareness while still maintaining a degree of safety.
They said that the police’s interpretation of the Witness Protection Scheme, 2018, contradicts both its letter and spirit.
‘Attorney-client privilege breached’
The advocates further accused the investigating officer of seeking to intrude into legally protected communications. “It is highly objectionable that the officer attempted to find out whether the redacted FIR and complaint were shared under the witness’s specific instructions,” they said, terming it a “serious overreach” that undermines fundamental protections.
‘Police know the witness’s location’
Contrary to claims that the witness’s whereabouts are unknown, the advocates said police officers had spent over four hours recording the witness’s statement on July 14 and had been emailed his temporary address on July 13.
“To say now that the witness is unavailable is simply false,” they stated.
‘Each recovery lowers the threat to witness’s life’
The release stressed the urgency of exhuming human remains. The witness, they said, had already voluntarily handed over one set of remains to the police and forensic team on July 11 and had named individuals in his sworn statement. However, no further action had been taken by July 16.
“The witness believes that each body recovered reduces the motive to eliminate him,” the advocates wrote, expressing shock at the police’s inaction.
They urged authorities to view the witness not as an adversary but as someone “courageously seeking to correct a historic wrong,” and to act swiftly while the witness remains alive and willing to assist.