MUMBAI: Observing that the June 8, 2020, death of celebrity manager Disha Salian had “many glaring discrepancies” which necessitated proper and substantive investigation, Bombay HC directed CBI to file an FIR and probe the case thoroughly. No one is to be named as an accused without sufficient grounds, HC clarified.“Suspicious circumstances” surrounding the death necessitate the registration of an FIR, HC bench of Justices Sarang Kotwal and RR Bhonsale held. But HC said it has “not made any observations against any particular individual”.“The police probe raises more questions than it answers. Therefore, an investigation by CBI is necessary.”A delayed spot panchanama nine hours later, on June 9, has “indications that the police were not treating the case as an accidental death case but they were suspecting foul play,’’ the high court observed.HC had last Friday reserved for orders her father’s plea to probe the death as a murder, not suicide or an accident. The father’s counsel, Nilesh Ojha, cited “suspicious circumstances” to seek a proper CBI probe as he argued her death was “the outcome of a deep-rooted conspiracy involving powerful people”.Disha Salian (28) died by suicide and there was no foul play by anyone, the state submitted through its public prosecutor Shishir Hiray.Disha worked briefly with the late film actor Sushant Singh Rajput, who died just days later that month on June 14, aged 34, in his Bandra flat. Her father claimed both deaths were “interlinked”.Interact with the family with sensitivity, HC directed CBI on Wednesday. But simultaneously, “care should be taken that no innocent person is harassed and the offenders, if any, are made to face the trial,’’ the judgement authored by Justice Kotwal said.The father made allegations against Aditya Thackeray of Shiv Sena (UBT). Thackeray intervened and through his senior counsel Sudeep Pasbola said the allegations were “motivated with malafide intentions” to damage his reputation when he is “neither directly nor indirectly connected with any alleged offence.’’ Pasbola expressed sympathy for Disha’s father but said CBI cannot be directed to do a roving inquiry.The ruling made no reference to any names and directed: “Nobody shall be treated as an accused unless in the opinion of the IO there are sufficient gr-ounds to raise reasonable suspicion against him.”The state and Pasbola said the father can file a private complaint before a magistrate for police. HC said with two probes that went on for almost six years, it would be improper to ask Salian to now seek a police probe order from a magistrate. HC said Ojha is right the magistrate has no power to direct CBI to investigate. HC held that police had sufficient opportunity, but didn’t register an FIR to conduct a thorough probe, instead carried on a probe “inadequate and insufficient’’ in the facts of the case.
Share your thoughts in the comments
Be respectful · TOI community guidelines
HC clarified, “We have not made any observations against any particular individual. That would be strictly within the realm of the investigation.” Kuldeep Patil, CBI counsel, informed the court that the agency had never thus far probed Disha’s death. Both Hiray and Pasbola said the father can go with a private complaint to a magistrate first.HC, on being shown documents including the panchanama, photographs of the body, and other details from the inquiry, raised questions on various aspects it found “suspicious’’ including whet-her injuries were consistent with a fall from such a height and details regarding clothes.
