Zubeen Garg Chargesheet: How Much Truth Lies in 13 Pages Amid 12,000 Documents?

The murder case of celebrated singer Zubeen Garg has taken a dramatic turn with the submission of the Special Investigation Team’s (SIT) chargesheet, triggering both political and public scrutiny.

While the case will ultimately be decided in court, the contents of the chargesheet, alongside allegations of selective leaks, have raised pressing questions about negligence, accountability, and the process of investigation itself.

13 Pages Amid Thousands: How Much is Being Examined?

As previously stated by Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma and CID SDGP Munna Prasad Gupta, the SIT submitted a chargesheet reportedly running to around 2,500 pages, with additional documents bringing the compilation to nearly 12,000 pages. Upon inquiry and after obtaining a copy from my sources, MLA Akhil Gogoi revealed in a Facebook Live video:

"I found that the main report concerning the accused is contained only between pages 292 and 305 — just 13 pages in total. These pages include accusations against the accused, with six pages detailing the events involving the five prime accused and the remaining pages covering the two PSOs, making up the total of 13 pages."

This revelation has prompted questions about how much of the chargesheet truly examines the core allegations and whether crucial details are buried within the thousands of other pages.

Allegations Against the First Accused: A Pattern of Disregard

The chargesheet alleges that the first accused Siddharth Sharma caused Zubeen Garg to enter a state of intoxication and encouraged him to swim despite impaired coordination and reflexes. The victim allegedly swam without a life jacket and against explicit medical advice that warned against water exposure due to his condition.

Investigators claim that no medical fitness certificate was obtained for travel despite knowledge of the victim’s epilepsy. Vomiting and signs consistent with epileptic distress were dismissed as minor gastric issues. Financial motives were allegedly present, with plans to “retire” the victim while maximizing financial gain and diversifying business interests into sectors such as packaged water, hospitality, and transport.

Most disturbingly, the accused is alleged to have actively discouraged rescue attempts during the incident, reportedly instructing others, “Jabo de, jabo de” — meaning “Let him go.”

Allegations Against the Second Accused: Failure to Intervene

The second accused Shekhar Jyoti Goswami allegedly instigated the victim to enter the water, urging him to “go there.” Despite being the victim’s closest associate since 2013 and in the best position to intervene, the accused allegedly failed to attempt a rescue. Instead, investigators claim he gestured a thumbs-up to others on the yacht, minimizing the danger. This inaction reportedly contributed to the victim inhaling water, causing bodily injury, while no preventive action was taken even after signs of extreme fatigue and intoxication during an earlier swim attempt.

Allegations Against the Third Accused: Ignoring Medical Red Flags

The third accused Shyamkanu Mahanta allegedly supplied alcohol to the victim despite awareness that consumption could be fatal. He is also accused of failing to ensure safe accommodations and of facilitating further drinking.

The chargesheet claims the accused did not inform yacht organizers about the victim’s medical condition and, despite meeting the victim’s management team on the morning of the incident, failed to arrange safety, medical preparedness, or cancellation of the trip. Investigators allege the victim missed the “golden hour” for life-saving treatment and was transported by ambulance approximately 75 minutes after the incident.

Allegations Against the Fourth Accused: Encouragement and Inaction

The fourth accused Amritprabha Mahanta allegedly contributed to excessive alcohol consumption over two nights prior to the incident and withheld this information from the victim’s manager, event organizers, and even the victim’s spouse. He is accused of encouraging the victim to swim while fatigued, intoxicated, and without a life jacket, and of recording videos rather than alerting the yacht captain or intervening, despite close proximity. The chargesheet states that medication details were disclosed to organizers only after the incident occurred.

Allegations Against the Fifth Accused: Delayed Rescue

The fifth accused Sandipan Garg allegedly encouraged the victim to swim a long distance — approximately 226 meters to and fro — despite being intoxicated. Investigators claim the accused was in a direct position to stop the victim but failed to do so. Rescue attempts reportedly occurred only after others raised the alarm, and even then, the victim could not be saved. The accused did not call the yacht captain promptly, contributing to the victim inhaling seawater.

Procedural Controversy: Chargesheet Leak Raises Questions

The chargesheet was filed on December 12, 2025, and three days later, all accused were summoned via video conference, with copies provided to them and their families in prison.

Gogoi, who has been active on social media discussing the professionalism involved in obtaining case details and highlighting how the chargesheet was filed from Dispur despite the incident occurring in Singapore, made internal details public on Tuesday at midnight via Facebook Live, claiming that the SIT had not provided any specific information against the accused.

This has led to a political storm. The BJP has questioned how Gogoi obtained the chargesheet, noting that the court has only officially provided copies to the accused and their families. Allegations have been raised that Gogoi may have been advocating for the accused and attempting to provide protection. Reports indicate that any party can request the documents from the court, but the MLA’s public disclosure has sparked debate over the propriety and legality of his access.

A Chain of Neglect or Misfortune?

Taken together, the allegations describe an alleged chain of negligence — medical, moral, and human. The SIT’s chargesheet, the leak of selective information, and the ensuing political controversy force the public to confront difficult questions: How many warnings can be ignored before negligence becomes fatal? Can financial interests, familiarity, and convenience justify risking human life?

While the law will determine the culpability of the accused, society must reckon with the ecosystem that allowed alleged lapses to occur. The Zubeen Garg case is not only a test of judicial processes but also a reflection of how accountability, responsibility, and duty of care are treated in high-profile circles.

Also Read: BJP Accuses Sivasagar MLA Akhil Gogoi of Secret Ties with Zubeen Garg Murder Accused