Justice Deferred: The Ankita Bhandari Case and the Failure of Governance

The murder of nineteen-year-old Ankita Bhandari in September 2022 was not merely a crime of individual brutality; it was a mirror held up to the failures of governance, law, and justice in Uttarakhand. Ankita, a receptionist at Vanantara Resort in Rishikesh, was allegedly killed by resort owner Pulkit Arya, son of a former BJP leader, along with two staff members. The case immediately sparked outrage across the state, with thousands demanding accountability and transparency. Yet, more than three years later, the case continues to expose the cracks in India’s justice system. The announcement of a CBI probe in January 2026, followed by an FIR against an “unknown VIP” accused of obstructing justice, has reignited public anger and raised questions about the government’s inability to define the law clearly and deliver justice in time.

The first failure lies in the delay itself. Ankita’s parents and activists had long demanded a CBI investigation, fearing that local authorities were compromised. The government resisted until January 2026, when Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhami finally recommended a probe, citing respect for the family’s sentiments. This delay of over three years is not just administrative lethargy; it is symptomatic of a system where political connections dictate the pace of justice. The accused, Pulkit Arya, was not an ordinary citizen but the son of a politically influential figure. The suspicion that evidence was concealed or destroyed, now formalized in the FIR against a “VIP,” underscores how power can distort the course of law. Environmentalist Anil Prakash Joshi, who filed the complaint, stated that criminals had been convicted but allegations of suppression remained, necessitating a deeper probe into hidden influence.

The second failure is the government’s inability to define accountability. When the FIR was lodged against an “unknown VIP,” it was a tacit admission that the state machinery had failed to identify and act against those obstructing justice for years. Former Chief Minister Harish Rawat criticized the move, arguing that the FIR should have been filed by Ankita’s parents, not an activist, and questioned why the government had not acted earlier. The Congress party went further, demanding Dhami’s resignation and insisting that the CBI probe be completed within six months under judicial supervision. These statements reflect a broader political consensus that the government has failed to uphold its duty. By allowing ambiguity around the “VIP angle,” the administration has created a vacuum where justice is delayed and public trust eroded.

The third failure is structural. India’s criminal justice system is plagued by delays, with over 50 million cases pending across courts as of 2025. In Uttarakhand alone, thousands of cases remain unresolved, and conviction rates in crimes against women hover below 30 percent. The Ankita case exemplifies how systemic inefficiencies combine with political interference to deny justice. Despite clear evidence of wrongdoing, the process has been dragged out, leaving the victim’s family in limbo. The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, which replaced the Indian Penal Code in 2023, was supposed to modernize criminal law. Yet, the FIR against the “VIP” was filed under sections 238, 249, and 45 of the new code, highlighting that even new laws cannot function if enforcement is weak and accountability absent.

The fourth failure is moral. Governance is not merely about passing laws but about ensuring that citizens feel protected. Ankita’s murder became a symbol of how women remain vulnerable in workplaces, especially in hospitality and tourism, where exploitation is rampant. Alka Lamba of the All India Mahila Congress emphasized that the case was mishandled and workplace safety regulations ignored. The government’s inability to enforce these protections reflects a deeper disregard for women’s rights. When justice is delayed, it sends a chilling message that women’s safety is negotiable, contingent on political convenience.

The announcement of the CBI probe and the FIR against the “VIP” are attempts to salvage credibility, but they raise more questions than answers. Why did it take three years for the government to act on the parents’ demand? Why was evidence allegedly suppressed, and who benefited from this delay? Why has the state failed to name the “VIP” even now? These questions strike at the heart of governance. A government that cannot define the law clearly, cannot enforce accountability, and cannot protect its citizens has abdicated its responsibility.

The Ankita Bhandari case is not an isolated incident. It is part of a larger pattern where political power shields the guilty and justice becomes a distant dream. The outrage in Dehradun and Rishikesh, the protests across Uttarakhand, and the national attention the case has drawn are reminders that citizens are no longer willing to accept silence. Justice delayed is justice denied, and in Ankita’s case, justice has been denied for far too long. The government’s failures—administrative, political, structural, and moral—have compounded the tragedy, turning a personal loss into a public indictment of the state.

If governance is to mean anything, it must begin with accountability. The CBI probe must not become another exercise in delay. It must identify the “VIP,” expose the suppression of evidence, and deliver justice swiftly. Anything less will confirm what many already believe: that the government has failed not only Ankita but the very idea of justice. In the words of Kabir, often invoked in such moments, “When I was, Hari was not; now Hari is, I am not.” For Ankita’s family, justice must mean that the state is present, not absent, that the law is defined, not distorted, and that governance is accountable, not complicit. Until then, the case will remain a haunting reminder of justice deferred and governance denied.