The Bombay Excessive Courtroom whereas ordering a CBI investigation into the alleged ‘suspicious’ dying of Disha Salian, the previous supervisor of actor Sushant Singh Rajput, took into consideration the a number of and grave discrepancies within the preliminary investigation carried out by the Mumbai Police.
A division bench of Justice Sarang Kotwal and Justice Ranjitsinha Bhonsale whereas being attentive to the ‘obtrusive’ discrepancies, opined that it was thus, vital for an company just like the CBI to research the case.
“The Police Officers are required to conclude the investigation beneath Part 174 of CrPC on the earliest to see whether or not registration of FIR is critical. That is vital to make sure that the proof, if any, is just not destroyed or doesn’t disappear as a consequence of passage of time. The investigation can not go on for an inordinately very long time. Within the current case, the investigation was carried out in two phases and it went on for about six years. This isn’t the thing of investigation beneath Part 174 of Cr.P.C. The investigation carried out by the police raises extra questions than it solutions. Subsequently, investigation by CBI is critical on this case,” the judges stated within the order.
The order got here on a plea filed by Disha’s father – Satish, who claimed that his daughter received to find out about some ‘objectionable’ actions of the highly effective individuals and she or he knowledgeable the identical to Sushant after which these ‘highly effective’ individuals learnt concerning the growth and thus to silence her she was murdered. The daddy claimed that his daughter was gang-raped after which murdered.
The Mumbai Police, which initially investigated the case had maintained that it was an unintended dying case, whereby Disha died after falling from the twelfth flooring of a high-rise constructing in suburban Malad.
In his plea, Satish highlighted a number of discrepancies like no main damage on the physique regardless of falling from twelfth flooring, very much less blood discovered, delayed Panchnama, no correct recording of statements and so forth.
The judges, nonetheless, famous that within the current case the mandate of part 176 of the CrPC was not correctly adopted as no enquiry was performed by a Justice of the Peace and additional the police too failed to stick to the provisions of part 174 of the CrPC.
“This inquiry is both as an alternative or along with the investigation held by the cops. Within the current case, no such inquiry is held by the Justice of the Peace empowered to carry inquest. If the inquiry is held, the Justice of the Peace is responsibility sure to tell the kinfolk of the deceased. This explicit step is just not taken within the current case,” the judges famous.
On this case, the bench famous that the Spot Panchnama was performed belatedly and there are indications that the police weren’t treating the case as an unintended dying case however they had been suspecting foul play. The judges famous that originally, the police interrogated Rohan Rai, Disha’s buddy, who highlighted some essential features equivalent to his different two associates didn’t let him to go to the bottom flooring the place Disha’s physique was mendacity and in addition that he was allowed to come back downstairs from his flat on the twelfth flooring, solely after her physique was shifted to the hospital.
“As we’ve got noticed, the spot panchnama was carried out belatedly. There are statements of no less than two witnesses, who had been standing close to the spot the place she had fallen. That they had truly heard the sound of any person falling. Each these witnesses have described that she had fallen on her face and blood was oozing from her head. These statements are recorded on August 15, 2020 and August 14, 2020 respectively. The police had not recovered any blood stained earth from the spot and there was no bleeding damage to the pinnacle besides bleeding damage to the chin. Their statements had been essential,” the bench stated.
The judges additional famous that the inside examination confirmed that there was linear fracture of cranium bones and ribs. All different organs had been intact. The entrance enamel had fallen.
“If the deceased had fallen on her face from twelfth flooring, then it’s troublesome to just accept that there was just one damage of the dimensions 1 x 1 x 1 cm within the nature of CLW over the chin. Not a single facial bone was fractured. There was neither fracture of mandible nor even of nasal bone which is kind of delicate. We discover this troublesome to just accept. This, in fact, could be topic to knowledgeable’s opinion. We discover that there are too many obtrusive discrepancies which necessitated correct and substantive investigation beneath the provisions of Sections 154 to 173 of CrPC. That was not achieved within the current case. Subsequently, we’re of the thought of opinion that this case deserves registration of FIR and investigation in a cognizable offence,” the bench held.
The bench whereas noting the ‘historical past’ of the case, thought of the truth that the investigation was carried out in two phases by the police, which was occurring for nearly greater than six years. Subsequently, within the details of the case, the judges opined, it might not be correct to ask the Petitioner to strategy the Courtroom of Justice of the Peace and search police investigation. Nonetheless, the judges famous that the Justice of the Peace has no energy to direct the CBI to research into the offence.
“On this explicit case, we’re of the opinion that the police had adequate alternative to research the offence however they haven’t registered the FIR and haven’t carried out the investigation of a cognizable offence. As an alternative, they performed investigation beneath the provisions of Part 174 of CrPC, which in line with us was insufficient and inadequate within the details of the current case. Subsequently, on this case, one other investigating company like CBI is required to research the offence,” the judges dominated.
The bench, subsequently, ordered the CBI to nominate a suitably skilled and senior Officer as an Investigating Officer on this case, who’s ordered to report Satish’s assertion and register the FIR. The I.O has been additional requested to conduct the investigation relating to all features surrounding the circumstances wherein the Petitioner’s daughter misplaced her life.
Look:
Advocates Nilesh Ojha, Abhishek Mishra, Vijay Kurle, Shivchand Mishra, Ishwarlal Agarwal, Tanveer Nizam, Dipali Ojha, Anushka Sonawane, Devkrishna Bhambri, Shivam Gupta, Ayush Tiwari, Sonal Manchekar, Sagar Ugale, Payal Padwale, Vikas Pawar, Priyanka Sharma, Dipeeka Patil, Ranjeet Yadav, Jairam Yadav, Sumer Singh, Pratik Sarkar, Bhagwan Kasture, Rahul Yadav, Jayendra Manchekar, Meena Thakur and Ravi Jadhav appeared for the Petitioner
Chief Public Prosecutor Shishir Hiray together with Extra Public Prosecutor Sangeeta Shinde and Advocates Shubham Joshi, Ankit Patil, Devavrat Hiray, Sanjay Kokne, Krishna Jaiwar and Aruna Borkar represented the State.
Senior Advocate Sudeep Pasbola together with Advocates Rahul Arote, Uttam Singh Rathore, Shubham Gharbudve, Rajan Gurnani represented Aaditya Thackeray.
Advocates Kuldeep Patil, Saili Dhuru, Digvijay Kachare, Anay Joshi, Yukta Sawant, Sanika Joshi and Sumitkumar Nimbalkar represented the CBI.
Case Title: Satish Salian vs State of Maharashtra (Prison Writ Petition 1612 of 2025)
Quotation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 420
