Botched up DNA sampling derailed Soujanya’s case, say SIT sources

Bengaluru 

A highly placed source in the Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing the Dharmasthala mass burial case said, “botched-up DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid) sampling derailed Soujanya’s case.” The SIT appears to have studied the case in its entirety.

It is noteworthy that the SIT has also recorded the testimony of Chikka Kempamma, who allegedly saw men kidnapping a girl (Soujanya) in October 2012. Soujanya was killed in the same month, and the accused was acquitted by the trial court. Chikka Kempamma, who hails from Mandya district, had visited the temple during that time. Kempamma’s statement was recorded on September 19, 2025. 

Technically, for any investigation team to probe this case, it requires the court’s permission if they find new evidence against the same accused. Otherwise, it would amount to double jeopardy for the accused since the prosecution has already failed to provide evidence. However, a criminal lawyer (who did not wish to be named) said, “If any investigation agency finds new evidence against a different individual, then the government can reopen the probe without the court’s intervention.”

SIT sources revealed to blrpost.com that “in the case file, it was found that the DNA sampling was insufficient to draw any inference against the accused or others. This cannot be possible, as even the slightest touch can yield DNA.” This shows the sampling was botched. The source also said there was “an interesting find in Soujanya’s case.”

On the other hand, in multiple videos, Chinnayya—who is accused in the mass burial case (39/2025)—has alleged the involvement of others. His second statement was recorded under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The recording sessions went on for three days (September 22, 25, and 27).

Sources in the SIT maintain that Chinnayya’s second statement contradicts the first. In his first statement, he had alleged that he was forced to bury several bodies illegally, and an FIR was registered in this connection at Dharmasthala police station. Now the question is whether he has spoken about Soujanya’s case in the new statement, and whether the SIT was asked by the State government to reinvestigate this controversial case.