Zubeen Garg death probe: Transparency questions linger amid Assam CM's statements

Guwahati: The investigation into the sudden death of Assam’s beloved singer and cultural icon, Zubeen Garg, is facing intense public and political scrutiny over allegations of procedural delays, lack of transparency, and direct political interference.

Zubeen Garg died on September 19, 2025, in Singapore while attending the Northeast India Festival. The official narrative shifted quickly: initial reports of a scuba diving accident were soon superseded by the Singapore autopsy report, which stated he suffered a seizure—consistent with his history of epilepsy—while swimming after a yacht party at St. John's/Lazarus Island, leading to drowning.

Delayed SIT Deployment Undermines Credibility

Following widespread public suspicion of foul play, Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma directed the formation of a 10-member Special Investigation Team (SIT) under the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) on September 24, 2025.

However, the credibility of the probe was immediately undermined by a significant one-month delay. Despite the urgency of the case, key SIT officers, including Assam CID Special DGP Munna Prasad Gupta and Titabor Co-District SP Tarun Goel, did not reach Singapore to begin on-site investigations until October 20.

CM’s Role and Witness Secrecy Questioned

The CM’s direct involvement has further fueled the controversy, with critics alleging he has usurped the SIT’s investigative role. Instead of relying on diplomatic channels to secure testimony from the Singapore-based NRIs who organized the yacht party, CM Sarma publicly urged the people of Assam to pressure the NRIs to appear before the SIT in Guwahati.

The primary concern regarding transparency emerged when seven Assamese NRIs, including Abhimanyu Talukdar, Tanmoy Phukan, and Bhaskarjyoti Dutta, appeared before the CID office to provide statements.

In a stark contrast to other local witnesses who were permitted to speak to the media, these key NRI witnesses were allegedly barred from public comment upon leaving interrogation. This effective gag order has led to pointed questions from the public and opposition: Is the government attempting to conceal information related to the yacht party?

Furthermore, critics allege the CM has preempted the investigation by offering different versions of events and even detailing what the SIT would conclude before the probe was complete, raising concerns about political interference in a police matter.

Political Accusations and Conflicting Statements

Opposition parties, including Congress and CPI (M), have openly accused the BJP-led government of mishandling the investigation and politicizing the tragedy for electoral gain. The CPI (M)’s Assam unit specifically highlighted the constant emergence of "different versions" of events, asserting that the truth remains obscured.

Compounding the confusion, the Chief Minister has repeatedly issued statements regarding the scope and projected findings of the SIT—a body he is not a member of—raising fundamental questions about the impartiality of the investigation process itself.

Amid the political and public turmoil, the SIT has had to issue clarifications condemning the circulation of "fake" post-mortem documents and edited videos online, while the CM has generally condemned attempts to exploit the case politically.