Virar, June 27: A shocking case of alleged gang-rape involving a 40-year-old woman has come to light in the Dongarpada area of Virar West. Acting on the victim’s complaint, the police have registered a case against two named individuals and one unidentified person and have initiated an investigation.

According to the First Information Report (FIR), the incident occurred between 2:46 A.M. and 4:30 A.M. on June 24. The complainant alleged that Tejas, Deepak, and an unidentified accomplice acted in collusion. They allegedly took her to a secluded lane in Dongarpada and forcibly gang-raped her.

Based on the victim’s complaint, an FIR was initially registered against the three accused at the Virar Police Station under Section 70(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). As the incident falls within the jurisdiction of the Bolinj Police Station, the case has been transferred there for further investigation. Police officials are currently conducting a detailed probe into the matter.

In a separate incident reported earlier in September 2025, a 17-year-old girl from Kalyan in Maharashtra’s Thane district was allegedly raped by seven men in their twenties over a period of five months. Officials stated that the abuse began after one of the men befriended her on social media.

The crime surfaced when the victim’s family discovered objectionable videos of her circulating online. All seven accused were arrested and produced before a local court, which remanded them in police custody.

The victim, a college student, first met the primary accused on Instagram in April 2025. Their friendship soon developed into a relationship. He secretly recorded their sexual encounters without her consent and shared the objectionable footage with six of his friends, according to an official from the Mahatma Phule police station.

These six friends belonged to affluent families in the Murbad and Bhiwandi areas of the district. The group started blackmailing the minor, demanding sexual favors and threatening to post the videos on social media platforms if she did not give in to their demands.

Pune, June 27: The investigation into the murder of Pune realtor Ketan Agarwal took a fresh turn after police questioned Sahil Goyal, brother of prime accused Siya Goyal, for nearly 10 hours. During the interrogation, Sahil reportedly told investigators that the family would have cancelled the marriage had Siya expressed any unwillingness to marry Ketan.

According to police officials, Sahil appeared before investigators on Friday morning and was allowed to leave only late in the evening after being extensively questioned. Officers sought details about Siya’s relationship with co-accused Chetan Chaudhary and verified several aspects of the case.

“If Siya had said she didn’t like Ketan, we would have stopped the wedding,” Sahil reportedly told the police.

An official from the Lonavala Rural Police Station confirmed the questioning, saying Sahil had been summoned in the morning and released after several hours of interrogation.

Police allege that Ketan Agarwal was murdered on June 18 at Lohagad Fort after being pushed off a cliff by his fiancée, Siya Goyal, 20, and her alleged lover, Chetan Chaudhary, 22. Investigators suspect the duo had conspired to eliminate Ketan because Siya allegedly no longer wanted to go ahead with their marriage, which was scheduled for November.

Ketan, who served as Director and Chief Marketing Officer of his family’s real estate firm, Success Group, initially appeared to have died in a trekking accident. However, investigators later concluded that the death was the result of a planned conspiracy.

The case was first registered as an accidental death after Siya claimed Ketan had slipped while trekking. The investigation took a different direction after police examined CCTV footage from the ticket counter at Lohagad Fort. The footage allegedly showed a man wearing a hoodie and shorts walking a short distance behind the couple despite the day’s temperature being around 33 degrees Celsius.

In one clip, Siya was allegedly seen looking back while the hooded man suddenly sat down. Police later identified the individual as Chetan Chaudhary.

Investigators further claim that Siya had repeatedly persuaded Ketan to visit Lohagad Fort in the weeks leading up to the incident. The couple reportedly visited the fort on May 31, and she again suggested another trip on June 4, which was reportedly prevented by Ketan’s mother. Police also allege that on June 14, Siya attempted to push Ketan from the cliff, but he managed to save himself by grabbing a bush. When questioned, she allegedly claimed there had been a snake nearby.

Meanwhile, Siya’s mother has maintained that her daughter was not keen to visit Lohagad Fort on the day of the incident. She claimed that during a video call on the evening of June 17, Ketan and his mother persuaded Siya to accompany him despite her saying she had a family function the next day and wanted to rest.

Siya’s father also rejected reports suggesting an extravagant wedding budget. He confirmed that the wedding was scheduled to take place in Udaipur in November and said the family had reserved 70 rooms at a hotel where the tariff was very high. According to him, the overall wedding expenditure was expected to remain below Rs 3 crore.

On the other hand, Ketan Agarwal’s father, Vishal Agarwal, dismissed speculation that his son’s use of a toupee could have played any role in the alleged crime.

“Ketan had a small patch of hair loss due to medical reasons, but this was clearly communicated well before the marriage was finalised,” he said.

“If she had any issues, she could have just said ‘no’. It would have been very easy for Siya to simply call off the wedding if that was an issue for her,” he added.

The case has attracted significant attention across Maharashtra as Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis recently met Ketan’s father in Pune and assured the family of full support during the legal proceedings.

Responding to the family’s request, the Maharashtra government has agreed to conduct the trial in a fast-track court and has appointed senior advocate Ujjwal Nikam as the special public prosecutor in the case.

Describing the incident as deeply disturbing, Fadnavis said it highlighted a larger social concern.

“It is an extremely shocking and incomprehensible incident. As a society, we need to reflect on why educated young men and women from good families develop such criminal intent and a desire for revenge. This is not merely a criminal issue; it also has a social angle,” he said.

Congress has demanded an inquiry into Vishwas Nagre Patil, who was appointed as Nagpur Commissioner from Mumbai Anti-Corruption Bureau, after a video of him reciting the homily of its founder Dr. Krishna Hegdewar and describing the RSS as a patriotic organisation, went viral.

The Congress has written on Twitter and Facebook that an IPS officer enters the service by taking an oath on the Indian Constitution and accepting the responsibility of treating all citizens equally. He does not identify with any religion, caste, party or ideology. He identifies only with the Constitution. However, after watching the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh stage and Nangre Patil’s speech praising the Sangh, Hindutva and Dr. Hedgewar, a fundamental question arises: was he appointing as a constitutional post? Or was he representing a particular ideology? Now the question is not limited to Nangre Patil alone but is directly related to Maharashtra Home Minister and Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis. Therefore, as Chief Minister/Home Minister, Fadnavis should give clear answers to some questions before the people of Maharashtra. As per Rule 13(2)(f)(iii) of the All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968, an IPS officer requires prior permission from the government to attend a private media video or similar event. Did Vishwas Nangre Patil take prior permission from the Maharashtra Home Department or the state government to attend this event? If so, under which rule was it given, will a copy of it be made public? If permission is not taken, will the government take action for violation of the All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968? Violation of Rule 3(1)?. The All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968 clearly states that an officer should not indulge in any conduct that is unbecoming of his post. It would be appropriate for a common citizen to go to the forum of a particular ideological organization and publicly praise that ideology. But is it appropriate for an IPS officer in the service? A police officer is a guardian of the law, not a propagator of ideology.

Political neutrality or political loyalty?
Rule 3(1A)(ii) clearly states that every member of the service shall maintain political neutrality. “Political neutrality is the soul of the IPS service. So the question is whether to go to the forum of the Sangh and praise the ideology of neutrality or to express public loyalty to a particular political ideology? If tomorrow a senior police officer goes to the forum of any other religious or political organisation and starts praising them in the same way, how will the public have faith in the administration? Is the Constitution supreme or the ideology of the Sangh?

Rule 3(2B)(ii) binds every officer to the supremacy of the Constitution. The Constitution does not belong to any one religion, caste or ideology. It belongs to all Indians. So is it constitutional neutrality for a constitutional officer to go to the forum of a particular ideological organisation and publicly praise it? Rule 3(2B)(vi): “Suspected of being influenced” This rule prevents an officer from being influenced by any organisation or person that may affect his official duties.

Today, millions of citizens of Maharashtra are asking that if an officer openly praises a particular ideological organization on a platform, who will guarantee that his decisions tomorrow will not be influenced by that ideology? This is the most serious question. Rule 5(1): says,

“No member of the service shall be associated with any organization participating in politics.” “No officer in the service shall be associated with any organization participating in politics.” This rule is not limited to membership alone. The word “with affiliation” has been used deliberately. Then, will going to the platform of the Sangh and openly praising it not be considered “association”? Today, the question is not of one person.

The question is of the credibility of the Indian administrative system.

The question is of the supremacy of the Constitution.

The question is of maintaining the dignity of the khaki uniform. Therefore, this matter should be investigated, the permits should be made public and the government should be clear whether there has been a violation of the rules in this. Because there is no person, institution, or ideology greater than the Constitution. When IPS officer and Nagpur Commissioner Vishwas Nagre Patil was contacted to know his stand on this matter, he did not receive the call. After this viral video, there has been a stir among IPS officers as most IPS officers are part of any event from time to time, in such a situation, will action be taken against these IPS officers too?