Family of missing Assam dentist awaits DNA report as discovery of skeleton raises new questions

In a major development in the case of missing Guwahati-based dentist Dr. Debanjib Sharmah, a skeleton recovered near the Lohit river in Arunachal Pradesh has become the center of investigation, raising more questions than answers for the anguished family.

To facilitate this crucial step, they traveled from Guwahati to Tezu—a journey of over 12 hours. Although Dr. Sharmah’s 82-year-old mother was unable to give a sample due to frail health, his daughter provided hers. Meanwhile, the entire family—including his mother, wife, daughter, and other relatives—has continued to cooperate fully with the authorities throughout the investigation.

The family has commended the Arunachal Pradesh Police for handling the matter with sensitivity and professionalism, and has expressed hope that the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT), communicated to them last Saturday, will bring greater clarity to the case.

Yet, nearly a month since Dr. Sharmah vanished, their anguish has deepened. Instead of answers about his whereabouts or a recovery of his body, the investigation now centers on identifying skeletal remains—a development the family fears may lead to what they call an “unwarranted closure,” leaving numerous crucial questions unresolved.

Among the key concerns the family continues to press are:

At the top of the family’s concerns is what they see as the most glaring and unsettling question: How could a living human being of flesh and blood transform into a skeleton in just about 20 days? The family is bewildered that this question isn’t being asked more forcefully by investigators or others following the case. They argue that natural decomposition under typical conditions would not result in such rapid skeletalization, especially given the environment and climate of the region.

Adding to their doubts, the family wonders whether the remains found might actually belong to someone else previously buried along the riverbank. Certain communities in the region observe burial customs that involve interring the dead near rivers. The family believes this possibility cannot be ruled out without a thorough investigation and should be considered seriously before any conclusions are drawn about Dr. Sharmah’s fate.

Why did Dr. Debanjib Sharmah, who habitually avoided rivers and other water bodies and was reportedly cautioned by hotel staff against venturing near the river, end up there? He was last seen within the premises of Tulow Resort. How is it that none of the hotel staff, who were allegedly in the same vicinity, perceived any immediate danger posed by the river? Why would a seasoned biker and avid photographer willingly leave behind his motorcycle, camera, and even his mobile phone at the hotel before heading toward a potentially hazardous area?

Was Dr. Sharmah’s disappearance accidental, or could foul play have been involved? The skeleton reportedly retained minimal soft tissue, making it extremely challenging for medical experts to confirm or rule out critical injuries such as strangulation or head trauma. By contrast, in the recent Meghalaya couple case, the investigation took only 16 days, and the discovery of Raja Raghuvanshi’s body—bearing visible injuries—dramatically shifted the course of inquiries. Despite the tragedy, that case at least offered a degree of closure that Dr. Sharmah’s family now desperately seeks.

Search efforts reportedly commenced the very day Dr. Sharmah was reported missing on May 31. Yet it took more than 20 days to locate the skeleton—discovered merely 15–20 kilometers from Tulow Resort. The family is troubled by this delay and wonders whether quicker action might have yielded a more intact body, potentially allowing for a thorough postmortem examination to uncover vital clues. Was there a lapse in the initial investigation that caused this critical delay?

What exactly transpired in the hours immediately before Dr. Sharmah is said to have drowned? The family is frustrated by the lack of CCTV footage, eyewitness accounts, or physical evidence—such as preserved tissue—that could shed light on the circumstances of his disappearance. They also question why Dr. Sharmah’s mobile phone was returned to the family merely two days after he went missing, as though authorities had prematurely concluded that drowning was the only explanation.

For now, the family anxiously awaits the outcome of the DNA analysis, clinging to the slender hope that the results may prove negative leaving open the possibility that Dr. Sharmah is still alive somewhere or, at the very least, paving the way for a more definitive and transparent closure to this troubling case.