“This is a serious case wherein an individual has lost his life and it is very much imperative for the police to make sure that the family members that have been left behind are kept in loop about the investigation being conducted and the evidences that they want to present be at least analysed and properly taken care of”. This is what the Judicial Magistrate First Class Sanyam Jain of Rohini Court said on Thursday as the Judge reprimanded the Delhi Police over the allegations of a botched up probe months after a man was found dead at a rented home in Northwest Delhi.On August 8, Satyabodh Choudhary, 33, was found dead, “hanging from a water pipe”, at his rented accommodation at Shyam Colony in Northwest Delhi’s Budh Vihar.While the crime scene was investigated the same day, his family members alleged “foul play”, according to officers. Twenty-three days later, police carried out a reinspection after the crime scene was initially sealed off. The investigating officers then allegedly recovered a “suspected suicide note” and a “blood-stained broom” from the premises.Suspecting that this was a murder and not an abetment to suicide case, as as initially claimed, advocate Pravesh Dabas, on behalf of the complainant, Babita, Satyabodh’s sister, moved an application in court on August 24, citing the unexplained delay in lodging FIR, and a “complete failure” to record statements from crucial family members.Subsequently, while hearing the case,JMFC Sanyam Jain of Rohini Court reprimanded the Delhi Police multiple times for the handling of questions pertaining to the probe.On September 25, the ACP concerned was asked by JMFC Jain to file a reply on whether the custodial interrogation of Satyabodh’s wife was required, whether she was cooperating or not, and whether the scene of crime was properly sealed on the date of offence.During a hearing on October 6, the complainant’s counsel questioned if the police had sought expert opinion on the feasibility of the act. “Suicide could not have been committed by the flexible pipe recovered in this case,” Dabas argued. He had also questioned if the locked crime scene could have been accessed externally through a top-floor or ground-floor grill.Story continues below this adIn its order the same day, the court also asked whether the scene of crime could be accessed through a grill on the ground floor and top floor and whether any opinion was sought by the Investigation Officer if the suicide could take place through the pipe used for the alleged suicide.In the order, JMFC Jain said: “…this court finds it to be a deplorable practice that replies are being forwarded by SHO and ACP concerned without going through the same even once.”In its reply dated October 15, the police said that the interrogation was not required and that the premises had been sealed from outside. The same day, the court issued an order, “The reply is pertaining to order dated 25.09.2026, whereas order dated 06.10.2026 has been completely ignored”.As per the court order, the IO informed JMFC Jain that it was his mistake that the ACP was not apprised about the order dated October 6. The court in its order also asked the DCP concerned to personally step in and monitor the case “in a sensitive way”.