Who was Saksham Gautam Tate, the Dalit Buddhist youth killed by OBC girl’s family and what led to the tragic crime: Here is what we know so far

A 20 year old man, Saksham Gautam Tate, was killed in Nanded district on 27 November, days before his 21st birthday. The man was killed by the father and brothers of his girlfriend, Aanchal Mamilwad. The attack has been described by the police as an honour driven attack linked to an inter-community relationship.

According to media reports, the events escalated on Thursday when Aanchal’s younger brother attempted to take her to the Itwara Police Station to lodge what she alleges was a false complaint against Saksham. When she protested, she claimed that two policemen, identified as Dheeraj Komalwar and Maheet Asarwar, encouraged the family to “kill him before coming back” instead of filing fabricated cases.

In the evening on the same day, Saksham was intercepted in Minidnagar, Junaganj, by Aanchal’s father, Gajanan Mamilwad, and her brothers, Himesh and Sahil. According to a police statement, Saksham was shot and then his head was smashed with a stone to ensure he died on the spot. Police detained eight accused within hours of the incident, including a minor and a woman. The minor has been sent to a juvenile home and the woman has been placed in judicial custody. Four key accused were sent to police custody.

The police have registered the case under Sections 103, 61(2), 189, 190(1), 191(2) and 191(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023, Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, and Section 3/25 of the Indian Arms Act.

Both the accused and the victim had prior criminal records, and some of them faced charges under MCOCA as well. Assistant Commissioner of Police, Prashant Shinde, is leading the probe in the matter. Allegations of police complicity raised by Aanchal are being probed separately.

According to a Dainik Bhaskar report, while Aanchal’s father was opposing the marriage, his own was a love marriage. Aanchal’s mother, Jaishree, is a Rajput. Reportedly, when Jaishree came in contact with Gajanan, she was already married and had a son.

There is a video of Gajanan dancing with Saksham. Saksham was frequently at Aanchal’s house, which led to a relationship between them. When Gajanan came to know about it, he became furious and threatened Saksham to stay away from Aanchal several times.

अंबेडकर जयंती के अवसर पर आँचल के पिता मृतक सक्षम के साथ नाचते हुए दिखाई दिए थे, जिसका वीडियो सामने आया है . सक्षम के दोस्तों ने आरोपी पिता को कंधे पर बिठाकर घुमाया था. बताया जाता है कि हत्या से पहले आँचल के पिता और भाई ने मृतक का भरोसा जीतने के लिए साज़िश के तहत उससे नज़दीकी… pic.twitter.com/wk7mDqaS1R

— NDTV India (@ndtvindia) December 1, 2025

OpIndia tried contacting police to learn more about the matter, however they refused to comment as the matter is under investigation.

A symbolic marriage and a grieving family

In a dramatic and emotional gesture, the day after the murder, when the body was about to be taken for cremation following post mortem, Aanchal visited Saksham’s house and applied haldi and sindoor to his body, symbolically marrying him. In a statement, she said they had planned to elope after his 21st birthday. Saksham, according to Aanchal, hoped to convince her family for an approved marriage.

#Nanded Horror: Woman Marries Her Boyfriend’s Body After He Is Brutally Killed by Her Family

A shocking case of suspected honour killing has emerged from Nanded, #Maharashtra, where a 20-year-old man, Saksham Tate, was brutally murdered by his girlfriend’s family. The attackers… pic.twitter.com/LGJBrRAog7

— BNN Channel (@Bavazir_network) December 1, 2025

Aanchal, who is a first year BSc student, claimed that Saksham supported her studies and wanted her to join civil services. She further added that Saksham himself wanted to join civil services. However, investigation into Saksham’s past revealed he was involved in several criminal activities making it impossible for him join any government service, let alone civil services. Aanchal has demanded capital punishment for his family members who killed Saksham.

The surge of anti-Brahmin propaganda online

As news of the killing spread, a parallel narrative quickly took shape on social media, with several accounts attempting to frame the incident as yet another instance of so called Brahmanical oppression. This was despite the girl’s own clarification that Saksham was Buddhist, and her family belonged to the OBC community. The rush to impose an anti-Brahmin angle, detached from the facts of the case, became a major driver of online outrage.

#WATCH | Nanded, Maharashtra | A woman, Anchal, applied vermillion on her head with the blood of her boyfriend, Saksham Tate, who was allegedly killed by her father and brother.

Anchal says, "We were together for three years. My family got to know about it. Because he was a… pic.twitter.com/PKGqgw3PwN

— ANI (@ANI) December 1, 2025

Speaking to the media, Aanchal said, “We were in a relationship for three years. My family got to know about it. Because he was ‘Jai Bhim’ (Buddhist), my family did not agree to our marriage. My family had told him that if he wanted to marry me, he would have to convert to Hinduism. He was ready to do this also.” However, a campaign is being run on social media making it a case where an upper caste family killed a Dalit boy.

Anchal belongs to Mamilwad caste which, according to police recruitment document, comes under Special Backward Class (SBC) in Maharashtra.

In post on X, propagandist Harsh Mander wrote, “Two brothers kill the boy their sister loved as he was of a “lower caste”. The distraught girl “marries” the corpse of the man she loved. What can be a more devastating a comment on the violence & prejudice that so deeply poisons our society?”

In a post, Saib Bilawal, though did not comment openly, but highlighted “caste” being the reason behind the murder.

Propaganda handle ‘The Dalit Voice’ wrote, “Honour Killing. Saksham Tate was brutally killed due to his inter-caste relationship in Nanded, Maharashtra. The boy was Dalit and the girl belonged to an upper caste. Her family could not tolerate their relationship, and they murdered him.”

Saksham’s criminal past

During the course of examining official records related to the case, OpIndia accessed a court document that lists multiple offences previously registered against Saksham Tate. According to the document, he had been named in at least eight criminal cases over the past few years. These entries, now part of the investigation’s wider context, shed light on his history with local police and the circumstances surrounding his activities before the incident.

Interestingly, in December 2024, Aanchal filed a complaint against Saksham at Itwara Police Station claiming he molested her. At that time, Aanchal was under 18 years old, so Sections 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act were invoked along with Sections 74 and 78 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). In her complaint, Aanchal claimed that on 22 November 2024, Saksham stalked her and took her to a room against her wish. He took objectionable photographs and thereby outraged her modesty. Aanchal was just three days away from turning 18 at that time.

However, during the bail hearing, Saksham’s advocate told the court that Saksham did not force her and she went with him herself. Further, he did nothing against her will. Aanchal did not appear in court to contest the bail plea.

The court noted that the FIR did not indicate any sexual exploitation committed by Saksham against the victim. Considering her age, the court noted that she had attained the age of understanding and it appeared she had willingly accompanied Saksham. He was released on bail with conditions including co operation in the investigation. This particular case was still ongoing in the Nanded court.

According to a judgment that impugned a detention order against him on 8 September 2025, it was noted that he was involved in eight criminal cases in different police stations in Nanded. A robbery case in Shivaji Nagar Police Station, another robbery case in Bhokar Police Station and one in Umri Police Station were mentioned. However, other cases were not mentioned in the judgment.

According to court documents, he was taken into preventive detention under the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act on 15 May 2025. The state called him a “dangerous person” under defined under Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug-Offenders, Dangerous Persons and Video Pirates Act, 1981 or MPDA Act. While arguing the case, the state added, “Due to the terror created by the petitioner, people are not coming forward to lodge report against him and, therefore, it affects the public order.”

He filed an appeal against the detention order. The cases he was involved in were mentioned by the police while opposing the quashing of the detention order.

The High Court quashed Saksham Tate’s preventive detention under the MPDA Act after finding that the order was passed with clear non application of mind and without meeting the legal threshold of a public order threat. The judges noted that although eight offences were registered against him, the District Magistrate relied only on two cases, ignored the fact that Saksham had already secured bail and anticipatory bail, and based the detention on weak material such as in-camera statements and FIRs involving unknown assailants. The court held that these incidents, at most, created a law and order situation, not a disturbance to public order, and therefore there was no justification to categorise him as a “dangerous person” under a harsh preventive detention law.

The unfolding facts show that the case is far more layered than the simplified caste narrative being pushed online. From the family’s opposition, allegations of police misconduct and Aanchal’s symbolic marriage to the uncovering of Saksham’s extensive criminal history and a quashed preventive detention order, each element adds complexity to an already volatile situation. As the investigation continues, it remains essential to separate emotion from evidence and acknowledge that this tragedy involves multiple intersecting realities rather than a single convenient storyline.