Court Orders Probe Into Body Handling Lapses

By Sumit Arora••6 min read
A man in an olive-green short-sleeved uniform holds a stack of white papers in a doorway beside a wooden door inside an official building corridor.
Illustrative image: A Delhi court order puts Gurugram police and hospital paperwork on Manchanda's body under fresh scrutiny.

GURUGRAM: Judicial Magistrate First Class Rahul Jain at Saket Court on Tuesday ordered an investigation into the possible role of Gurugram Police officers and the medical officer of Gurugram Civil Hospital in the handling and disposal of the body of Yuvraj Singh Manchanda, 31, saying involvement in the disappearance of evidence could not be ruled out.

The body was recovered on 10 September at 4:05 pm. ZIPNET details and photographs were uploaded only on 16 September, two days after cremation. The court called the six-day delay clear negligence and a failure of standard operating procedure. Manchanda's sister Harsimran, the complainant, lost the chance to see and cremate the body because of those lapses, the order noted.

Postmortem work by medical officer Manav Chauhan was described as grossly deficient and incomplete. The report listed external injuries as nil and findings on the neck, scalp and skull as NAD, with cause of death recorded as ante mortem drowning. That picture sits awkwardly against the Delhi Police investigating officer's theory of two shots near the neck and related recoveries. The court flagged the absence of an X-ray for metallic objects and the failure to preserve viscera and diatom samples.

DCP report in two weeks; Chauhan on 15 October

Chauhan has been summoned to appear on 15 October with a written explanation. The body was cremated as unidentified even though a Lajpat Nagar FIR on Manchanda's disappearance had been filed on 11 September. A copy of the Saket order goes to the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Gurugram, who must report within two weeks on Badshahpur police station lapses: the delayed ZIPNET upload, the absence of postmortem videography, and the failure to inform the Executive Magistrate.

The investigation direction cites Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 238, which deals with disappearance of evidence and giving false information. The sister has also sought judicial monitoring and preservation of records and evidence from Badshahpur police station so that case papers are not altered or lost while the probe runs.

Delhi Police on 16 September arrested Anya Vats and Sanyam Sachdeva from Uttarakhand as the alleged killers in the wider murder probe. That arrest track is context only here. Tuesday's Saket order is aimed at Gurugram's procedural handling of the body, not a fresh finding of guilt against the Delhi accused.

The order is distinct from the Haryana DGP's earlier public admission of lapses in the same body-handling chain. Court scrutiny now puts Badshahpur paperwork, Civil Hospital postmortem practice and DCP-level reporting on a two-week clock, with Chauhan's personal appearance fixed for mid-October. How the DCP's report and Chauhan's explanation read will shape the next hearing dates.

Sources and reporting

Order of Judicial Magistrate First Class Rahul Jain, Saket Court (South-East), New Delhi, 29 September 2026 in the Yuvraj Singh Manchanda matter; directions to DCP Gurugram; Delhi District Courts (https://delhicourts.nic.in/)

Related Stories