When consent is ignored: Reflections on the Lohagad Fort tragedy

By Raqif Makhdoomi 

The alleged murder of 25-year-old Ketan Agarwal at Pune's Lohagad Fort has shocked the country. What was initially believed to be an accidental fall has, according to the police investigation, turned into a case of alleged conspiracy and murder. The incident has not only devastated two families but has also raised difficult questions about forced marriages, social pressures, individual choice, and the criminal justice system.

Ketan had visited Lohagad Fort with his fiancée, Siya Goyal, on June 18. The couple was reportedly scheduled to marry later this year. According to the police, Siya allegedly conspired with another accused, Chetan Chaudhary, to kill Ketan. The investigation was reportedly triggered after Ketan's sister noticed inconsistencies in Siya's account of the incident. Siya allegedly claimed that Ketan fell while taking her photograph, but the family found this difficult to believe, considering that Ketan was an experienced trekker. These contradictions eventually led investigators to examine the case more closely.

The tragedy is made even more heartbreaking by the circumstances surrounding it. Ketan belonged to a financially well-established family and was serving as a director in the family business at a young age. Reports indicate that an elaborate wedding was being planned for November at a luxury resort in Udaipur, with substantial expenditure already committed. Instead of celebrating a marriage, however, one family was left mourning the loss of a son while the other found itself confronting criminal allegations against its daughter. The emotional and psychological impact on both families is immeasurable.

According to the police, Siya stated during questioning that she had expressed her unwillingness to proceed with the marriage but that preparations continued despite her objections. These claims will ultimately be tested during the judicial process. Nevertheless, the case raises an important social question: if individuals are compelled—whether by family expectations or societal pressure—to enter marriages against their wishes, the consequences can be deeply damaging. This observation does not justify or excuse any act of violence. Murder, if proved, remains an unforgivable crime. However, preventing forced or unwilling marriages is equally important if society wishes to reduce such tragedies.

Even today, in many parts of society, family honour is often placed above the wishes of the individuals getting married. Many young people hesitate to reject an engagement or call off a marriage because they fear social stigma, criticism from relatives, or damage to their family's reputation. While most people facing such circumstances never resort to violence, they may nevertheless spend years living in unhappy or emotionally distressing relationships. Society must recognize that choosing not to marry—or ending an engagement by mutual consent—is far better than forcing individuals into relationships they do not want.

The investigation has also focused on the role of co-accused Chetan Chaudhary. His family has denied all allegations, claiming that he has been falsely implicated and had no role in the incident. Reports indicate that call detail records show frequent communication between Siya and Chetan during the months preceding the incident. Investigators have also referred to CCTV footage and alleged attempts to conceal location data. However, it is important to remember that neither call records nor personal relationships, by themselves, establish criminal guilt. Under Indian criminal law, the prosecution must prove every allegation beyond reasonable doubt, and the courts will determine the evidentiary value of each piece of material presented during trial. Circumstantial evidence is significant only when it forms a complete and unbroken chain pointing exclusively toward guilt.

This case has inevitably drawn comparisons with several other high-profile criminal cases involving intimate partners. Such incidents receive widespread media attention because they involve betrayal of trust within close relationships. However, every criminal case is unique and must be judged on its own facts rather than through comparisons or public sentiment.

The discussion surrounding such cases has also revived debates about legal protections available to men facing harassment or abuse within relationships. While Indian law provides several important safeguards for women against domestic violence and cruelty, some commentators argue that men who face abuse or coercive behaviour have limited legal remedies. Whether existing laws require reform is ultimately a matter for Parliament and informed public debate. Any legal framework should aim to provide justice to every victim while ensuring that the rights of the accused are also protected.

The death of Ketan Agarwal is, above all, a human tragedy. Whatever the final outcome of the trial, it should encourage society to have honest conversations about consent in marriage, respect for individual choice, mental health, family expectations, and the importance of resolving personal conflicts through lawful means rather than violence. Equally important is the need to allow the judicial process to determine criminal responsibility based on evidence rather than speculation.

A society that respects individual autonomy, discourages coercion in marriage, and upholds the rule of law is better equipped to prevent such tragedies. The hope is that justice will be delivered through due process and that lessons drawn from this painful case will help create a more compassionate and responsible society.

---

*Law student and human rights activist