Uncontrolled digging could erase Dharmasthala mass burial evidence: Soil scientist warns SIT
Bengaluru: A soil scientist, who has studied tropical lateritic soils, has released a note in anonymity, warning the Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing alleged mass burials in Dharmasthala (1994–2014) that improper excavation could permanently destroy critical forensic evidence.
The scientist cautioned that in the coastal, high-rainfall environment of Dharmasthala, bones from older graves are often not visually present due to the region’s acidic laterite soil, which accelerates decomposition. “In these conditions, the visual absence of bones does not mean there was no burial,” the expert stressed. “Chemical and microscopic soil analysis may be the only way to detect older graves.”
According to the soil scientist, Dharmasthala’s lateritic soil has a pH of 4.5–6, is porous and rich in iron and aluminium oxides, and is subject to over 3,500 mm of annual rainfall. These factors together cause rapid bone mineral dissolution and collagen breakdown. “In as little as 15–20 years, complete skeletons can be reduced to just teeth, enamel shards, or micro-residues,” the scientist said.
Drawing on comparisons with Rwanda, Cambodia, Sri Lanka, and Srebrenica, the scientist estimated that:
- Graves less than 15 years old have a reasonable chance of yielding skeletons.
- Graves 15–20 years old may yield only partial skeletons and teeth.
- Burials older than 20 years often retain only chemical signatures and microscopic fragments.
“In Dharmasthala’s soil, the probability of finding a full skeleton after two decades is near zero,” the expert said.
‘JCBs will destroy what’s left’
The soil scientist was particularly critical of the use of heavy machinery in the investigation. “Uncontrolled digging with JCBs can obliterate brittle bone fragments, erase burial stratigraphy, and mix burial soil with surrounding soil, diluting chemical signals,” he warned. “It’s equivalent to destroying the crime scene.”
The scientist emphasised that disturbed lateritic soil can quickly resemble undisturbed ground, making it almost impossible to detect graves later.
GPR as a map, not a microscope
The expert also noted that Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) could play a limited role in the investigation. “GPR can help locate soil disturbances, but in wet, iron-rich lateritic soils, it cannot ‘see bones.’ For burials decades old, chemical analysis of soil is far more reliable,” he said.
Call for controlled forensic exhumation
The soil scientist urged the SIT to stop all mechanical digging and adopt a forensic protocol:
- Use GPR or other non-invasive methods to locate anomalies.
- Excavate in small, measured layers under forensic supervision.
- Collect soil samples for chemical and microscopic analysis.
- Sieve soil to recover micro bone fragments and teeth.
“Only a controlled, scientific approach will preserve what little evidence may remain in this environment,” the scientist said. “If these traces are destroyed, the truth about the alleged burials may never be proven.”
The SIT is investigating allegations of mass burials linked to the disappearance of individuals between 1994 and 2014 in Dharmasthala. No official response to the scientist’s concerns has been issued.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
'Someone must be held accountable': HC converts civil suit on Goa nightclub tragedy into PIL
Panaji (PTI): The Bombay High Court on Monday converted a civil suit against Birch by Romeo Lane nightclub into a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) saying "someone has to be held accountable" for the tragedy in which 25 people were killed.In a stern observation, Goa bench of the High Court of Justices Sarang Kotwal and Ashish Chavan said the local panchayat had "failed to take suo motu cognisance" of the club and had taken "no action despite complaints."
The division bench directed the Goa government to file a detailed reply on the permissions granted to the nightclub.
The High Court, while fixing January 8 as the next date of hearing, pointed out that commercial operations were continuing in the structure despite it having been served a demolition order.
The original petition was filed after the December 6 tragedy by Pradeep Ghadi Amonkar and Sunil Divkar, the owners of the land on which the nightclub was operating.
ALSO READ: Veteran Congress leader Shamanuru Shivashankarappa laid to rest with full state honours
Advocate Rohit Bras de Sa, the lawyer representing the petitioner, was made amicus curiae in the matter and has been asked to file a detailed affidavit in the matter.
In their petition, Amonkar and Divkar highlighted "the alarming pattern of statutory violations that have remained inadequately addressed despite multiple complaints, inspections, show-cause notices, and even a demolition order".
They contended that these violations posed "immediate threats to public safety, ecological integrity, and the rule of law in the state of Goa."
Investigations by multiple agencies into the nightclub fire have revealed various irregularities, including lack of permissions to operate the nightclub.
The Goa police arrested five managers and staff members of the club, while co-owners Gaurav Luthra and Saurabh Luthra have been detained in Thailand after they fled the country.
