Ankita Bhandari's family members met with senior CBI officers at the agency's Delhi office, walking them through details connected to multiple aspects of the ongoing investigation. Investigators told those present that every dimension of the matter would receive careful scrutiny and that the process would be conducted without favour or prejudice.

Ankita Bhandari, who worked as a receptionist at a resort outside Rishikesh in Uttarakhand, was killed in September 2022, and that case now sits at the centre of the dispute. Her killing took place on 18 September 2022, and six days later her body was recovered from the waters of the Chilla Canal.

Three individuals — resort proprietor Pulkit Arya, whose father Vinod Arya had been expelled from the BJP, along with staff members Saurabh Bhaskar and Ankit Gupta — faced arrest, a chargesheet, and ultimately a life sentence handed down on 30 May 2025 by Additional District Judge Reena Negi at Kotdwar, covering convictions that included murder, destruction of evidence, and related offences.

Addressing reporters at the Dehradun police headquarters, V Murugesan — holding the rank of Additional Director General of Police overseeing Crime and Law and Order in Uttarakhand — stated that the three individuals connected to the killing had been taken into custody within a day of the incident and that all three remain held in custody. A special investigation team was assembled promptly, acting on directions issued by Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhami, the ADG noted.

Dushyant Gautam's move from his role overseeing the BJP's Uttarakhand affairs to the Sikkim governorship has brought questions about an alleged "VIP" link in the Ankita Bhandari murder case back into public discussion, with those questions gaining renewed attention following the posting. Questions about whether high-profile figures played any role in the killing have circulated in public debate from the time the crime took place.

Investigators' documents referenced a "VIP" designation tied to a specific room, yet law enforcement clarified that the three defendants were convicted on the weight of evidence gathered against them individually. Bhandari's relatives have pressed on multiple occasions for the identity of the unnamed "VIP" guest to be disclosed, arguing that people in positions of power have not faced the same level of scrutiny applied to others throughout the inquiry.

Ankita Bhandari's parents staged a protest at India Gate in Delhi, pressing for a freeze on Dushyant Kumar Gautam's appointment until the CBI investigation into the case concludes — a call that stood apart from the prior move to place a woman officer of DIG rank at the helm of the SIT set up to examine the matter. Both parents were taken into custody at Tilak Marg Police Station before being released.

Following the police action, family members put forward a renewed call for accountability while also voicing concern over Dushyant Gautam's nomination to the governorship of Sikkim. At a press briefing held outside a police station in the capital, the family called for the gubernatorial nomination to be suspended until a full inquiry into the outstanding questions around the matter had been completed.

Ankita's father told authorities they had a set period to act, expressing concern over the appointment that had recently been made through political channels. Relatives pressed for the release of phone records and location data tied to both Ajay Kumar and Dushyant Kumar across 18 and 19 September 2022, insisting the information be made available to the public without delay.

Pulkit Arya's older mobile handset became a point of contention at the proceedings, with his family asserting that investigators on the Special Investigation Team never retrieved the device. The family also pressed for answers about how the resort came to be demolished, along with a call to rebuild it so that the physical setting and any associated evidence would not be lost.

Relatives of Ankita Bhandari have taken the position that anyone whose name surfaced during the investigation should be cleared by the relevant investigative bodies before taking up any constitutional post. Critics contend that placing someone facing such allegations into a high constitutional role runs counter to the accountability that justice requires.