Sowjanya case: Kusumavati’s legal team urge Home Department to reconstitute SIT

Bengaluru

Senior Advocate Shekhar G. Devasa, acting on instructions from the legal team representing Kusumavati Gowda, has approached the Karnataka Home Department seeking the immediate reconstitution of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) constituted to conduct the de-novo investigation into the 2012 rape and murder of 17-year-old sowjanya. Kusumavati is the mother of the victim. 

In a representation submitted on September 25, a day after the Karnataka Government issued its notification constituting the new SIT, Devasa has challenged the composition of the team, contending that it does not comply with the directions issued by the Supreme Court of India while ordering a fresh investigation into the case. The letter was given to S Ambika, secretary to the Home Department. 

The representation follows the Supreme Court’s September 21, 2026 judgment in Kusumavathi Gowda Vs. Government of Karnataka & Others in SLP (Crl.) No. 5763/2026, through which the apex court directed a de-novo investigation into Crime No. 250/2012 registered at Belthangady Police Station in connection with sowjanya’s rape and murder.

The legal team has specifically sought the replacement of the SIT’s Chairperson, N. Shashikumar, IPS, Police Commissioner, Mangaluru City, and Venkatesh Prasanna, ACP, Bengaluru Rural.

Objection to SIT leadership

A central objection raised in the representation concerns the seniority of the officer appointed to head the SIT.

According to the representation, the Supreme Court had specifically directed that the fresh investigation be conducted by an SIT headed by a senior police officer of the State, with investigators proficient in modern technology.

The legal team has argued that the appointment of Shashikumar as Chairperson does not satisfy the requirement in the letter and spirit of the Supreme Court’s directions.

The representation therefore calls upon the Home Department to immediately replace the present Chairperson and constitute the SIT under an officer whose seniority, according to the petitioner’s legal team, conforms to the specific mandate of the apex court.

The representation also seeks the removal of ACP Venkatesh Prasanna from the newly constituted team.

It cites what it describes as serious complaints against the two officers and argues that the nature of the allegations and the importance of the investigation require an SIT whose members are demonstrably independent and unbiased.

Demand to keep previous investigators out

The legal team has also raised an objection concerning the participation of officers who were associated with earlier investigations into the sowjanya case.

The Supreme Court, according to the representation, had expressly directed that no officer who had previously been part of the investigation teams of the Belthangady Police Station, CID or Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) should be included in the new SIT.

The representation has therefore sought strict compliance with this direction while reconstituting the team.

The legal team has contended that the purpose of ordering a de-novo investigation would be undermined if officers who were involved in earlier stages of the investigation were permitted to participate in the fresh probe.

Fresh investigation after earlier probes

Sowjanya was raped and murdered in 2012, with the case registered as Crime No. 250/2012 at Belthangady Police Station.

The case subsequently underwent investigation by different agencies, including the local police, the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) and the CBI.

The Supreme Court, while ordering the de-novo investigation, identified what the representation describes as serious deficiencies in the earlier investigations, including unexamined leads and failures relating to the collection and examination of evidence.

The apex court thereafter directed the Karnataka Government to constitute a fresh SIT to undertake the investigation afresh.

The new probe is therefore required to operate independently of the earlier investigations and examine the case without being constrained by the conclusions reached by the previous investigating agencies.

Three-month deadline

The Supreme Court has also imposed a strict timeline on the fresh investigation.

The SIT has been directed to complete the de-novo investigation and submit the final police report within three months.

The representation assumes significance against this deadline, with the legal team seeking immediate action by the Home Department to ensure that the SIT is properly constituted before the investigation progresses.

According to the representation, any delay in resolving the objections regarding the composition of the SIT could affect the effective implementation of the Supreme Court’s directions within the stipulated period.

Legal team warns of approach to Supreme Court

The representation has also put the Karnataka Government on notice that further legal proceedings could follow if the SIT is not reconstituted in accordance with the Supreme Court’s directions.

It states that, should the State Government fail to act on the request and ensure compliance with the apex court’s order, the legal team would approach the Supreme Court seeking further and explicit directions concerning the constitution of the SIT.

The request has been made by Devasa on behalf of the legal team representing Kusumavati Gowda.

The legal team comprises Senior Advocate Shobha Gupta, Senior Advocate Shekhar G. Devasa, Advocate Ashutosh Dubey and Advocate Thashmitha Muthanna.

The immediate issue before the Karnataka Home Department is therefore whether the SIT notified on September 24 will continue in its present composition or be reconstituted in response to the objections raised by Kusumavati Gowda’s legal team.