TEZU, 29 Jun: In a significant development in the case of missing dentist Dr Debanjib Sharmah, the Tezu police have collected DNA samples from Dr Sharmah’s daughter.
Due to the poor health of Dr Sharmah’s 82-year-old mother, doctors refrained from drawing her blood. The family – including Dr Sharmah’s mother, daughter, wife, and other relatives – has cooperated fully with the police throughout the process, according to family sources.
The family expressed appreciation for the courteous and cooperative approach of the Arunachal Pradesh Police and welcomed the formation of a special investigation team (SIT), as informed to them last Saturday.
However, the family remains deeply distressed that, even nearly 30 days since Dr Sharmah went missing, the investigation has narrowed down to identifying a skeleton rather than recovering his body or determining his whereabouts. They fear that even if DNA tests confirm the identity, it could result in what they describe as an “unwarranted closure,” leaving many crucial questions unanswered.
The family has raised concerns over the circumstances leading to the river incident, questioning why Dr Debanjib Sharmah, who was known to avoid going near rivers (or any water body) and was reportedly forewarned by hotel authorities, end up in the river.
Stating that he was last seen within the resort premises, the family questioned why did-none of the hotel staff, reportedly present in the same location and environment, at least sense a grave danger from the river? “Why would an experienced biker and passionate photographer venture anywhere near the river, leaving behind his bike as well as his camera and mobile phone at the hotel?” the family questioned.
The family also raised the possibility of foul play.
“Was there any foul play involved? The skeleton reportedly retained minimal soft tissue, making it difficult for medical experts to establish evidence of strangulation, head injury, or other signs of violence. In comparison, the recent Meghalaya couple case was resolved in 16 days, with the discovery of the husband Raja Raghuvanshi’s body significantly altering the investigation following the autopsy. In that case, despite the tragedy, there was at least a form of closure,” the family source said.
“Despite search operations beginning on the day Dr Sharmah went missing (31 May), why did it take over 20 days to locate the skeleton – especially when it was ultimately found only around 20 km from Tulow Resort? Does this delay indicate lapses in the initial investigation?
“What were Dr Sharmah’s activities immediately before his alleged drowning? Why is there no CCTV footage, eyewitness testimony, or physical evidence (such as preserved tissue) to clarify the events leading to his disappearance?” the family asked.
While they await the DNA results, the family continues to hope that the tests prove negative, holding on to a slim chance of Dr Sharmah’s safe return – or, at the very least, a proper closure to the case.