The investigation into the death of 26-year-old Ketan Agarwal has reached a pivotal stage, with Pune Rural Police planning to reconstruct events at Lohagad Fort to test the version of events presented by the accused and establish the precise sequence of what transpired on the fatal day. The exercise represents a critical investigative tool in a case that authorities believe hinges on circumstantial evidence due to the absence of direct eyewitnesses to the alleged incident at the popular trekking destination.
The exact timing of the crime scene reconstruction remains confidential, police said, citing both security and operational investigative concerns. The exercise will focus particularly on charting the movements and interactions between the deceased, accused Siya Goyal, and her alleged associate Chetan Babulal Chaudhary throughout their time at the fort. Investigators intend to pinpoint the precise location from which Ketan was allegedly pushed, calculate the distance and trajectory of his fall into the ravine below, and assess the physical feasibility of the sequence of events as described by the accused. A dummy body will be deployed during the reconstruction to aid investigators in their analysis.
Police have laid out a pattern of behaviour they allege preceded the fatal incident. According to the investigation, Siya made multiple attempts to bring Ketan to Lohagad Fort, with the couple first visiting the location on May 31. When Siya sought another visit on June 4, Ketan's mother reportedly refused to allow it. During a subsequent trek to the site on June 14, investigators claim Siya attempted to push Ketan off a cliff, though he survived by gripping a bush. When questioned about the incident, Siya allegedly attributed the push to seeing a snake and claimed she was protecting him. Police believe this was a precursor to the fatal incident that occurred during another visit on June 18.
The investigation has widened to encompass seven individuals who have provided statements to authorities. Among those interrogated was Neeraj, an employee at Chetan's shop, who was detained and questioned for more than 24 hours. Although police found no direct evidence linking Neeraj to the alleged crime, investigators assert that he provided crucial information regarding communications between the accused on the day in question. According to the police version, Chetan deliberately left his own mobile phone behind and used Neeraj's device to contact Siya, a detail that investigators are scrutinising as they piece together the timeline of events. Authorities are now considering designating Neeraj as a key witness in the case, given his potential knowledge of the accused's movements and communications.
The case has become increasingly complex due to conflicting accounts from different parties. Police allege that Siya claimed Ketan had boasted of his family's influence and financial power, suggesting she felt trapped in the marriage and unable to escape despite her wishes. Investigators further contend that these statements, combined with evidence of the earlier attempted push and her repeated efforts to lure Ketan back to the fort, suggest a premeditated plan. However, Siya's mother has publicly disputed the police narrative, asserting that her daughter had no desire to go trekking and that it was Ketan who proposed the trips. She further alleged that Ketan's mother pressured Siya into accompanying him on these outings, presenting a markedly different picture of events.
The dynamics between the three individuals involved have drawn particular investigative attention. According to police, Siya met Chetan during a business meeting last year, and the two developed a relationship beginning in November 2025 whilst Siya's marriage preparations to Ketan were still underway. Siya operates a bakery business, while Chetan runs a dry fruit enterprise. Ketan, by contrast, held the position of Director and Chief Marketing Officer at Success Group, his family's real estate company, positioning him within a significantly wealthier socioeconomic sphere. This disparity in backgrounds and business ventures raises questions about the nature of relationships and potential financial motivations that investigators may be exploring.
The tragic incident was initially classified as an accidental fall during a trekking expedition, a common occurrence at popular hill fort destinations across Maharashtra's Sahyadri range. The reclassification from accident to alleged murder represents a significant shift in the investigation's direction, presumably triggered by evidence or statements that contradicted the accidental death narrative. The initial assumption of misadventure versus the current criminal investigation framework demonstrates how investigative findings can fundamentally alter the understanding of such incidents, particularly in remote locations where reconstructing events presents inherent challenges.
Siya's parents have made public statements regarding their daughter's potential culpability that reflect the emotional toll the case has taken on the family. They have declared that should a court find their daughter guilty, she deserves the maximum punishment allowable under law. In a particularly poignant and controversial statement, they expressed that their daughter should face the same fate as Ketan, suggesting she should be pushed from the identical location where the victim allegedly met his death. Such statements, whilst emotionally resonant, also underscore the family's apparent acceptance of serious allegations and their willingness to accept severe consequences should guilt be established.
The reliance on circumstantial evidence places considerable burden on investigators to construct a convincing narrative from indirect evidence, witness statements, communications records, and physical reconstruction exercises. In cases lacking eyewitness testimony, the sequence of movements, patterns of behaviour, prior attempts or threats, and the accused's own explanations for suspicious actions become paramount. The planned crime scene reconstruction serves to test whether the accused's versions are physically consistent with the geography and topography of Lohagad Fort, potentially either corroborating or undermining their accounts.
For Malaysian and Southeast Asian observers, this case illustrates the complexities that arise when allegations of murder emerge from incidents initially classified as accidents at popular tourist destinations. Lohagad Fort, situated within Maharashtra's scenic Sahyadri range, attracts trekkers from across India and abroad, much as various hiking destinations across Malaysia and the region do. The incident highlights the importance of thorough initial investigations at such locations, even when deaths initially appear accidental, as pattern evidence and circumstantial indicators can emerge upon deeper scrutiny. The case also underscores how relationship dynamics, financial disparities, and alleged infidelities can intersect with tragic outcomes, lending criminal complexity to what might otherwise appear as simple misadventure.
