In a recent update on the case of 18-year-old Pushpa Kumari, who disappeared almost 11 months ago from Bokaro district in Jharkhand, a forensic report presented in the Jharkhand High Court confirmed that the DNA extracted from a tooth of the recovered skeletal remains corresponds to Pushpa’s DNA profile. The report was based on findings from the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL) in Kolkata.
However, the complete DNA match between the entire skeleton and Pushpa’s parents has not been established yet. Pushpa, hailing from the Pindrajora police station area in Bokaro, went missing on July 31, 2025. Following an extensive search with no leads, her mother, Rekha Devi, filed a habeas corpus petition in the Jharkhand High Court seeking her daughter’s whereabouts.
During the investigation, Dinesh Kumar Mahto was arrested by the police based on technical evidence and questioning. The accused reportedly confessed to the murder of the girl, leading to the recovery of a human skeleton from a location disclosed by him. Despite the police’s assertions, Pushpa’s family has consistently refuted the claims, asserting that the retrieved skeletal remains do not pertain to her.
Amid this disagreement, the High Court instructed that DNA samples from the skeleton and the girl’s family be forwarded to the CFSL in Kolkata for analysis. In the recent court session, the forensic results were presented, with members of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) in attendance. The High Court has requested updates on the ongoing proceedings in the lower court regarding the case.
Additionally, the court inquired about the actions taken by the state government against allegedly negligent police officials involved in the investigation. It mandated the police to finalize the inquest of the recovered skeleton and fulfill other legal formalities. Despite the forensic findings, Pushpa’s family remains unconvinced that the remains belong to her.
The High Court emphasized the necessity of proceeding based on scientific evidence and legal protocols. The case will continue to be deliberated upon in subsequent hearings.
