The Bombay High Court (HC) on Thursday raised questions on the Mumbai police’s probe into the death of Disha Salian, the former manager of the now-dead actor Sushant Singh Rajput. It called the entire police probe into the case ‘futile’ and also questioned the manner in which the case was handled. 

The remarks were made by a bench of the HC, comprising Justices SV Kotwal and RR Bhonsale, which had been hearing a petition Salian’s father, Satish Salian. Satish alleged that his daughter was gang-raped and was murdered.

Court questions legal basis for reopening the case

Disha Salian died on June 8, 2020, almost a week before Sushant Singh Rajput’s alleged suicide. She is said to have fallen from the 14th floor of a residential building in Mumbai’s Malad area. 

Following her death, the police registered a case of accidental death and launched a probe, concluding that she had died by suicide. 

During the hearing on Thursday, the bench scrutinised the ADR inquiry under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which pertains to inquiries into deaths involving accidents, suicides or demise under suspicious circumstances. 

Public prosecutor Shishir Hiray told the court that the initial report had been accepted in February 2021, but the probe was reopened for reassessment in December 2023 following public doubts over the case. 

The judges hearing the case questioned the legal basis for reopening an inquiry under Section 174 of the CrPC.

The bench said, “How did you restart? Where does it say under Section 174 CrPC? There is a grey area.” It further questioned the significance of a probe that had continued for years, remarking, “So what is the sanctity of the investigation that you conducted for six years? It is all a waste.”

CCTV footage, witnesses under scrutiny

The bench then pointed to the alleged shortcomings in the initial spot inquiry, holding that no direct CCTV footage covered the precise location from where Salian fell to death. 

Furthermore, it also examined discrepancies in witness statements relating to a locked door. While witnesses reportedly referred to the door as locked, the panchnama contained no corresponding record of physical damage. 

The judges also noted that statements recorded during an ADR inquiry may not carry the same evidentiary value as material gathered during a criminal probe. 

Bench raises questions over post-mortem

The court also examined concerns surrounding Salian’s post-mortem examination. It noted that state guidelines require autopsies in such cases to be carried out by two doctors, whereas Salian’s post-mortem was reportedly conducted by one doctor. 

As per the report, the autopsy took place nearly three days after her death. It recorded injuries to her head, legs, hands and chest, and the head injury was listed as fatal. Bleeding from her mouth and nose was also mentioned in the autopsy report. 

As cited during the hearing, the report stated that there was no evidence of sexual assault or rape

“FIR option still open,” recommends court

The HC clarified that the police could still register an FIR and can again conduct a probe if circumstances warranted it. It also observed that Salian’s father could challenge the police closure report before the appropriate court. 

Responding to the government’s contention, questioning why Satish Saian approached the court four years after his daughter’s death, the bench said his state of mind had to be taken into consideration. The court remarked, “He was in a state of shock,” asking why the option of a formal investigation should be closed altogether. 

The bench also distanced itself from the political firestorm surrounding the case, asserting, “We do not care about the politicians. We are concerned with his case.”