Ponda: A controversy has erupted over the death of home guard Dinesh Gaude, who allegedly died in a gaur (Indian bison) attack at Bethora in Ponda on Wednesday evening, with the forest department questioning the forensic findings while doctors at the South Goa District Hospital have firmly defended the postmortem report.The dispute intensified after deputy conservator of forests (North Goa division) Jiss Varkey wrote to the South Goa superintendent of police seeking an investigation into the circumstances surrounding Gaude’s death, including an analysis of his mobile call data records. The move came amid doubts raised by the forest department over whether the injuries sustained by Gaude were consistent with a gaur attack.However, associate professor of forensic medicine and toxicology at the South Goa District Hospital, Dr Madhu Ghodkirekar, rejected the claims and clarified that the injury pattern and internal damage found on Gaude’s body were consistent with horn-inflicted injuries that could have been caused by a gaur. “The injuries in this case are far more severe than those typically caused by cows or bulls, which explains the nature of the damage,” Ghodkirekar said.He added that forest officials have no authority to independently interpret postmortem findings related to human deaths. Even veterinary experts, he added, cannot issue opinions on forensic reports prepared by medical professionals.Ghodkirekar also expressed concern over the alleged circulation of the confidential postmortem report on social media platforms, calling it a serious breach of criminal investigation procedure. He said the forensic department would seek an inquiry into how the document was leaked.“Since this concerns the death of a tribal youth, all officials involved must handle the matter with utmost sensitivity and confidentiality,” he said.Meanwhile, GFP has demanded a transparent and impartial inquiry into the incident. In a statement issued on Monday, GFP chief spokesperson Prashant Naik urged the home department to investigate the conflicting claims made by the forest department and forensic authorities.
