Bhubaneswar: The Odisha government's decision to hand over the disappearance of two sensitive inquiry reports to a Special Investigation Team (SIT) may have transformed what initially appeared to be a missing-file case into a potential accountability probe reaching deep into the administrative chain that operated inside the former Chief Minister's Office (CMO).

The central question before investigators is no longer whether the files are missing. It is who last had custody of them, when exactly they disappeared, and why only these two reports vanished while hundreds of other files were returned during the government transition of 2024.

The answers, officials believe, are likely hidden in a trail of registers, digital workflow logs, handover records, CCTV footprints and administrative custody documents.

Why Focus Shifting Towards Former CMO Functionaries

The FIR already establishes that the two reports were officially received by the CMO years ago.

One was the voluminous Justice A.S. Naidu Commission report on the 2008 Kandhamal riots, submitted to the government in December 2015 and received in the CMO in September 2016.

The second was the inquiry report into the devastating Hospital fire tragedy, which reached the CMO in May 2018.

Both reports entered the state's highest executive office through formal government channels. Neither was officially returned.

That fact narrows the universe of possible custodians.

Sources familiar with government file movement procedures say every sensitive document passing through the Secretariat leaves a paper and digital footprint. Consequently, investigators are expected to focus first on the officials and staff who had direct responsibility for maintaining, routing and preserving records inside the CMO during the final years of the previous administration.

June 4, 2024 Puzzle

The most intriguing element in the emerging timeline is June 4, 2024.

According to records cited in the FIR, several files sent by departments to the CMO were returned during the period when election results signalled a change of government.

However, the Naidu Commission report and the Hospital inquiry report were allegedly not among them.

This singular anomaly has become the investigation's key anchor point.

Investigators are expected to identify:

• Which desk handled outgoing files on that date;
• Which officers cleared file movements;
• Which staff members physically managed records during the transition period;
• Whether the two reports were present in the inventory immediately before the change of government.

If dozens of files returned while only two remained untraceable, the SIT will inevitably ask whether the omission was accidental or deliberate.

Why Only These Two Files?

That question may ultimately become more significant than the disappearance itself.

The Naidu Commission report dealt with one of Odisha's most sensitive episodes – the 2008 Kandhamal violence that followed the killing of Swami Laxmanananda Saraswati and four associates.

The commission examined:

• The truth behind the violence (Religious conversion);
• Social and ethnic fault lines;
• Government response mechanisms;
• Rehabilitation efforts;
• Future preventive measures.

Justice Naidu's final report reportedly ran beyond 1,000 pages after examining hundreds of witnesses, affidavits and exhibits.

The Hospital fire inquiry similarly involved questions of accountability on how a major public tragedy took place, which could have been easily averted.

Political observers note that both reports had the potential to generate uncomfortable debates regarding governance, administrative action, implementation failures or delayed responses.

That is why investigators may seek to determine whether the disappearance was linked to someone who believed the reports contained findings better kept out of public and political scrutiny.

How the SIT Will Reconstruct the ‘Whodunit’

Unlike conventional criminal cases, this investigation begins with a built-in roadmap.

Step 1: Follow the Registers

The SIT will scrutinise:

• Home Department registers;
• Chief Secretary's Office records;
• CMO inward and outward registers;
• Dispatch entries.

These records can establish the last officially documented movement of the files.

Step 2: Examine Handover Reports

Whenever officers, assistants or clerks relinquish charge, they formally certify which files were handed over.

Those charge reports may reveal the last documented custodian.

Step 3: Digital Forensics Through OSWAS

The Odisha Secretariat Workflow Automation System (OSWAS) could prove decisive.

Every file carries a digital trail.

Investigators can examine:

• File Tracking System (FTS) histories;
• User IDs accessing the files;
• Routing records;
• Status updates;
• Deletion or archival attempts.

Even if a physical file disappears, its digital fingerprints may survive.

Step 4: CCTV and Entry Logs

The investigation is also expected to examine:

• Secretariat access records;
• Visitor logs;
• Gate-pass data;
• Historical CCTV footage, where available.

The objective will be to identify whether any file movement occurred outside authorised channels.

Step 5: Chain-of-Custody Interrogations

The questioning is likely to proceed upward:

1.     Section officers and record custodians.

2.     Administrative staff and private secretaries.

3.     Senior bureaucrats attached to the CMO.

4.     Former top administrative functionaries who oversaw file management.

By matching physical records with digital logs, investigators hope to isolate the exact window during which the reports vanished.

Legal Stakes Are Considerably Higher Than a Missing File

The case carries implications extending far beyond administrative negligence.

If investigators establish deliberate concealment, destruction or unauthorised removal of records, multiple legal provisions may come into play.

Among them is Section 10 of the Public Records Act, which deals with destruction or unauthorised removal of public records and carries penalties including 5 years of imprisonment.

Other provisions relating to disappearance of evidence and breach of trust by public servants could become relevant depending on the findings.

The Political Question

The SIT's immediate task is locating the reports.

But the larger political question remains unavoidable:

How could two of the most sensitive inquiry reports in Odisha's recent history disappear from the state's most secure administrative office while countless other files survived the transition?

That question is precisely why the investigation may now move beyond missing documents and toward identifying individual responsibility within the former CMO's chain of custody.

For the SIT, the challenge is straightforward in principle but explosive in consequence: reconstruct the paper trail, identify the last custodians, and determine whether it is a deliberate act of concealment.

Also Read: Majhi Govt Revives What ‘Mo Sarkar’ Dropped: How Odisha’s 15-IPS Police Audit Aims to Fix Crime – Why Bhubaneswar, Cuttack, Ganjam Missing| Exclusive