Rajasthan HC orders IO change in tantrik-tainted jewellery theft probe
Synopsis
The Rajasthan High Court has drawn a hard line: criminal investigations cannot be run on a tantrik's word. After finding that a Head Constable in Nagaur allegedly visited a witch doctor in Alwar to identify a theft suspect — with no concrete evidence — Justice Munnuri Laxman ordered the officer's removal within 15 days and mandated a fresh, impartial probe.
Key Takeaways
The Rajasthan High Court ordered the removal of Head Constable Ratiram as investigating officer in a jewellery theft case within 15 days .
The probe concerned theft of gold and silver jewellery from Khemi Devi , 80 , of Utwalia village, Nagaur district , reported on 8 March .
The investigating officer allegedly visited a tantrik in Alwar district , who named the daughter-in-law's father as a suspect without evidence.
The state government admitted the IO visited the tantrik's location, though it denied villagers were taken along.
Justice Munnuri Laxman held that a criminal investigation cannot be conducted at the behest of a tantrik and directed transfer of the case to a sub-inspector or higher-ranking officer from another station.
The Rajasthan High Court has sharply criticised the police investigation into a jewellery theft case in Nagaur district, after it emerged that the probe was allegedly influenced by a tantrik (witch doctor), and ordered the removal of the investigating officer within 15 days. The ruling, delivered on 21 May, underscores a firm judicial line that criminal investigations cannot be steered by superstition.
Background of the Case
Khemi Devi, an 80-year-old resident of Utwalia village under Sri Balaji police station limits in Nagaur district, had filed an FIR on 8 March alleging theft of gold and silver jewellery belonging to her and her daughter-in-law from their home on the night of 7 March. Her counsel, advocate Manohar Singh Rathore, told the court that despite being furnished with the names of suspected persons, the investigating officer, Head Constable Ratiram, failed to recover the stolen jewellery or identify the accused.
The Tantrik Allegation
The petition further alleged that instead of relying on evidence, Head Constable Ratiram visited a tantrik in Alwar district along with the daughter-in-law's father and some village elders. According to the petitioner, the tantrik allegedly claimed that the daughter-in-law's father was involved in the theft, after which the police began treating him as a suspect without any concrete evidence and allegedly attempted to frame him in the case.
During the hearing, Public Prosecutor Vikram Singh Rajpurohit, appearing for the state government, submitted a status report from the Nagaur Superintendent of Police. While the prosecution denied that villagers had been taken to the tantrik, it admitted that the investigating officer had indeed visited the tantrik's location in Alwar district.
Court's Observations
The single bench of Justice Munnuri Laxman, after examining the status report and hearing both sides, observed that there was a possibility the investigation had been influenced or tainted by the tantrik's opinions. The court held that under no circumstances could a criminal investigation be conducted at the behest of a tantrik, and that an independent and impartial probe was necessary to identify the actual culprits.
Orders Passed
The Rajasthan High Court directed the Nagaur Superintendent of Police to transfer the investigation from Sri Balaji police station to a sub-inspector or higher-ranking officer from another police station within 15 days. The order effectively removes Head Constable Ratiram from the case.
This ruling adds to a pattern of Indian courts intervening when police investigations deviate from evidence-based procedure — a concern that legal observers say remains persistent in rural policing. The new investigating officer will now be expected to conduct a fresh, evidence-led probe into the theft.
Point of View
But for what it reveals — that in parts of rural India, the line between official investigation and superstition-driven accusation can blur with real consequences for the accused. A man was reportedly being framed on a tantrik's say-so, with no material evidence, by an officer of the state. The state's own admission that the IO visited the tantrik removes any ambiguity about what happened. Courts should not have to be the last line of defence against such conduct; supervisory police mechanisms exist precisely to catch this. That the Nagaur SP's status report did not itself flag the IO's conduct as a problem is as telling as the original transgression.
NationPress
7 Jul 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
Why did the Rajasthan High Court order the change of investigating officer?
The court ordered the removal of the investigating officer, Head Constable Ratiram, after finding that he had allegedly visited a tantrik in Alwar district and used the tantrik's opinion to identify a suspect in a jewellery theft case, without any concrete evidence. Justice Munnuri Laxman held that a criminal investigation cannot be conducted at the behest of a tantrik.
What is the Nagaur jewellery theft case about?
An 80-year-old woman, Khemi Devi of Utwalia village in Nagaur district, filed an FIR on 8 March alleging that gold and silver jewellery belonging to her and her daughter-in-law was stolen from their home on the night of 7 March. The police investigation into the theft was subsequently found to have been allegedly influenced by a tantrik.
What did the Rajasthan High Court direct?
The court directed the Nagaur Superintendent of Police to transfer the investigation from Sri Balaji police station to a sub-inspector or higher-ranking officer from another police station within 15 days. The order effectively removes Head Constable Ratiram from the case.
Did the state government deny the tantrik visit?
The state government, represented by Public Prosecutor Vikram Singh Rajpurohit, denied that villagers were taken to the tantrik, but admitted that the investigating officer had visited the tantrik's place in Alwar district. The court found this sufficient to conclude the investigation may have been tainted.
Who heard the petition in the Rajasthan High Court?
The petition was heard by a single bench comprising Justice Munnuri Laxman. It was filed by 80-year-old Khemi Devi, represented by advocate Manohar Singh Rathore.
