Beltangady, Aug 2, 2025: In connection with the Dharmasthala case, excavation at the ninth site identified by the witness-complainant in a forested area along the national highway has been completed, with no remains found.
The operation, which aims to locate bodies allegedly buried in connection with past criminal activities, is continuing for the fifth day within the Dharmasthala Police Station limits.
Today’s operation is considered highly significant. SIT officials have arrived prepared to excavate more than one site.
Excavation at site nine has been completed, and digging at the tenth site is scheduled to begin in the afternoon.
To prevent outside visibility, the complainant-identified sites 9, 10, and 11 along the roadside have been covered with screens.
The operation involves senior officers, including SP Jitendra Kumar Dayama, SIT officials, Puttur Sub-Divisional Officer Stella Varghese, Beltangady Tahsildar Prithvi Sanikam, a team of doctors from KMC Mangaluru, FSL personnel, ISD, and other authorities.
SIT should interrogate officer who threatened complainant: Demands Advocate representing Sujata Bhat
Advocate Manjunath N., representing Sujata Bhatt—the mother of Ananya Bhatt, a medical student reported missing from Dharmasthala—has stated that their complaint will strengthen the Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing the case. The complaint alleges that Manjunath Gowda, a police officer who is part of the investigation team, threatened the witness-complainant, coerced him into giving contradictory statements, and recorded the same on his mobile phone.
It is expected that the SIT will interrogate Manjunath Gowda regarding these allegations. Reliable sources indicate that the SIT, led by Pranav Mohanty, had already been keeping a watch on Gowda as a precautionary measure. Advocate Manjunath N. expressed confidence that these developments will further strengthen the SIT’s investigation.
The allegation that officer Manjunath Gowda threatened the witness-complainant to withdraw the complaint has surfaced, and the complainant’s legal team has reportedly submitted a formal complaint to the SIT chief. However, neither the complainant’s lawyer nor the SIT has issued any official statement on this matter.