The butcher of Benares by Mahendra Jakhar

"The butcher of Benares" by Mahendra Jakhar. This book is published by Westland in 2014 and has 332 pages.

Hawa Sing, Sr Inspector - Delhi crime branch, has come to Benares with his father. He finds the body of an American lady floating in Ganga, impaled with a wooden cross. Hawa Sing is asked to investigate. FBI sends their investigator Ruby Malik. Deceased was interested in Bhrigu Samhita (Maharshi Bhrigu was the first compiler of predictive astrology. Bhrigu Samhita is said to to contain information on past lives and predictions on current and future lives). More white Christans are killed. Each has some connection with Vatican. 

Who is behind the murder? Extremist Hindus or extremist Christans? What's the connection between astrology and astronomy? What is the Vatican angle?

Hawa Sing is a unique police officer. He has a bullet lodged in his brain that can't be removed. As a result he suffers pain and black outs. He is not afraid of dying, in that he is even reckless. He has aversion to technology and does not even have an email account. He is a very good investigator, prefers to work solo and is known to move stealthily vindicating his pseudo name 'Ghost'. 

Other characters are typical. They play their part. None worth specifically mentioning except the fog. Fog plays the role of a character in this book. The dense Benares fog adds to the unknown, the mystery. It also reduces the visibility. 

The female protagonist is Ruby, the FBI agent, who is half Anerican and half Pakustani. If the author brings in a character of such exotic mix in the play, there has to be a reason to it. But her ethnicity does not play ANY role in the story. Then why assign it to her? Why create a potential and not use it?

Bhrigu Samhita is central to the story but it remains unclear why it's existence was hidden from the world. In fact it's revelation would prove that Benaras is the oldest city in the world. 

The reason given by the killer for his killings is a bit lame and there is no direct or hidden reference of it in the story until the killer tells it. Author should have scattered something about it somewhere in the story. Thus killers justification appears artificial. 

Success of author lies in the fact that although I deduced who was not the killer, I was not able to recognize the killer. From the way book ends  it appears that author is planning a sequel. 

Why did I read this book? Curiosity.    

What I didn't like? Unrelated details, killer's logic. 

What did I like? Suspense about the killer. 

Read if you find this review interesting.