Ketan Agarwal Murder: Cops Say No Evidence on Who Pushed Ketan, Seek Lie Detector Test for Siya

Pune Rural Police on Thursday approached the court seeking permission to conduct a polygraph test on Siya Goyal, the prime accused in the Ketan Agarwal murder case, after admitting that no direct evidence currently establishes who actually pushed the Lohagad Fort businessman off the cliff. Investigators clarified that the objective is not to use the lie detector test result as courtroom evidence, since polygraph findings are not admissible under Indian law, but rather to uncover leads that can later be independently corroborated.

The case against Siya Goyal and her alleged lover Chetan Chaudhary remains entirely circumstantial. There is no eyewitness who saw Ketan Agarwal being pushed from the cliff, and no CCTV footage captures the alleged act itself. The only visual evidence places Chetan near the location wearing a hoodie, which police concede does not by itself prove murder. To conduct the polygraph test, both court permission and Siya's own consent are legally required.

Investigators are hoping the examination yields incidental disclosures, such as details of online searches, digital planning, or prior communication, that can then be independently verified through browser history, mobile data, deleted messages, or location records . Officials say this indirect route has become essential precisely because the central theory, that Siya and Chetan conspired to kill Ketan to avoid the wedding, still lacks a single piece of conclusive proof.

Adding to the complexity, Siya's brother Sahil Goyal has reportedly given a conflicting statement , telling police that Siya was enthusiastic about the wedding and actively took part in pre-wedding preparations, directly contradicting the prosecution's motive theory. Police sources say this inconsistency is one more reason investigators are leaning on digital forensics rather than testimony alone.

Pune Police are also treading carefully to avoid the procedural pitfalls that undid the prosecution in the Sonam Raghuvanshi case , where clerical and procedural lapses eventually helped secure bail for the accused. A senior police source noted that courts rule strictly on evidence and legal process, meaning even a minor documentation error could hand the defence a significant advantage. Meanwhile, Siya's lawyer Advocate Aashutosh Shrivastav has maintained that no eyewitness or solid evidence links his client to the crime, and that statements made in police custody cannot automatically be treated as courtroom evidence.