According to the report, 13-year-old twin brothers Vinay Chaudhary and Vishnu Chaudhary were killed while sleeping inside their maternal home in Dik, Rajasthan. Their mother, Preeti, initially claimed that an outsider had murdered them and moved their bodies to nearby fields, but police reportedly found evidence that the killings occurred inside the house. The report alleges that Preeti and her married lover, assisted by the lover's son, planned the murders because the boys objected to the affair and the lover did not want to live with them. Police reportedly recovered a weapon, clothing, and blood evidence, detained or arrested Preeti and others, and continued investigating.
Country: India
State/Province: Rajasthan, India
City/Region: Dik
Incident Type: Family Homicide
Relationship Status: Extramarital relationship
Relationship Duration:
Recorded context: Desire to replace or leave current partner
Reported initiator: Both
Relationship timing: During marriage or ongoing partnership, before separation
Incident Date: Oct. 20, 2026
Primary reported outcome: Homicide
Reported self-harm outcome: No suicide or attempt reported
Reported sequence: Order not reported / unclear
Additional victims reported: 1
Additional victim events:
Relationship Origins:
Relationship Stages:
Contributing Factors:
Red Flags:
Motives:
Relationship Outcomes:
Video hosted by YouTube · Viewer discretion advised
How the relationship or connection began.
Important relationship phases recorded for this case.
Reported red flags or early concern points.
Contributing factors and possible motives from the available sources.
2026-10-20
Recorded relationship or case outcome.
Infidelity
The reported relationship pathway involved a separated mother, an ongoing affair with a married man, and a proposed new marriage. The two younger sons allegedly knew about the affair and objected to it, while the lover reportedly refused to accept them into a future household. The report alleges that this relationship conflict led to planning, concealment, and a double homicide.
Police reportedly received information after the bodies were found in fields during the morning of Dussehra. Investigators initially considered Preeti's claim that an outsider was responsible, but reportedly found that the crime scene was inside the house. A weapon, clothing, blood evidence, and other material were recovered; the house was secured, and dog-squad, forensic, and other teams searched the house, village, and fields. The report says Preeti was detained or arrested and that other alleged participants, including the lover and his son, were questioned or arrested, although the procedural status is inconsistently described. A medical board reportedly conducted postmortems, and the investigation and case registration were still ongoing.
The initial account portrayed an unknown outsider as the killer and placed the bodies in the fields, but investigators reportedly concluded that the killings occurred inside the family home. Preeti's statements allegedly changed and contained contradictions. The source uses both detention and arrest language and gives inconsistent descriptions of the lover's and his son's exact procedural status.
The report places the family in the maternal home after Preeti had lived separately from Niranjan Singh for approximately eight years and after his reported death. It alleges that Preeti entered an affair with a married local man and wanted to marry him, while the two younger sons objected and the man reportedly refused to accept them. According to the report, the lover arrived at the home with his son and weapons during the night of the 19th, and the sleeping boys were attacked. Their bodies were allegedly moved to nearby fields, the house was cleaned, and Preeti then presented the incident as an outsider attack. Police reportedly connected the account to the house evidence, changing statements, recovered clothing, blood evidence, and the weapon.
The source describes a high-risk combination of secret extramarital involvement, separation, family opposition, pressure surrounding a proposed remarriage, alleged instrumental violence, involvement of additional people, and post-incident deception. These indicators are source-reported and do not independently establish criminal responsibility or causation.
The source presents a relationship-driven family homicide allegedly connected to an affair and a proposed remarriage. Important warning indicators included secrecy, conflict over a partner's acceptance of children, repeated objections by the children, alleged coordination with third parties, and attempts to create a false outsider narrative. The report remains an allegation-based media account, and final legal findings are not provided.
The most important reported early signals were the secret affair, the sons' repeated objections, the proposed remarriage, the lover's reported refusal to accept the two younger children, and the alleged involvement of the lover and his son in planning.
Reportedly important clues included the location of blood evidence and other signs inside the house, the recovered weapon and clothing, the short distance between the house and the field, and contradictions in Preeti's statements.
The strongest reported evidence types were the alleged indoor crime-scene indicators, blood evidence, recovered clothing, the weapon, forensic examination, dog-squad searches, postmortem examination, and witness or suspect statements. The source does not provide laboratory results or a full evidentiary record.
The report says Preeti initially claimed that an unknown outsider had killed her sons. Police officials reportedly said that the scene was secured, multiple teams searched the house and surrounding areas, and a clue was developed within approximately six hours. The source does not provide independent eyewitness accounts of the killing.
Follow-up investigation reportedly changed the understanding from an alleged outsider attack to a suspected killing inside the home involving Preeti and people connected to her lover. The report says further layers, arrests, evidence collection, and investigation remained ongoing.
The source does not establish the final court outcome, the complete identities and roles of the lover and his son, the exact weapon or forensic findings, the precise incident date and year, or the final charges. It also inconsistently describes whether the other alleged participants were arrested or only questioned.