Bombay HC questions Mumbai Police over refusal to file FIR in Disha Salian death case
The Bombay High Court on Monday asked the Mumbai Police to explain why it had not registered a First Information Report (FIR) in the death of Disha Salian, former manager of actor Sushant Singh Rajput, despite her father raising a suspicion of murder. The court also noted that the post-mortem and accidental death reports had not been provided to the family for five years.
A division bench of Justice Bharati Dangre and Justice Manjusha Deshpande was hearing a petition filed by Satish Salian, who has sought registration of an FIR against the police's finding of suicide. The bench questioned the police's decision to register only an Accidental Death Report (ADR) and not an FIR.
Advocate Nilesh Ojha, representing the petitioner, submitted that the police had shown a photograph of the body to the father, not the body itself. He also said that Disha's body was sent for post-mortem three days after her death, while Sushant Singh Rajput's autopsy was conducted within 24 hours of his death.
Ojha presented a report from forensic experts hired by the family. According to the report, the post-mortem findings were questionable. It noted the absence of injury marks consistent with a fall from the 14th floor and found that the body's landing position was approximately 10 feet away from the building, instead of directly underneath. The petitioner also alleged that photographs of blood stains had been “photoshopped”.
The State's Chief Public Prosecutor, Shishir Hiray, informed the court that on June 8, 2020, Disha had attended a small gathering at a friend's home. He said statements from friends recorded during the investigation supported the suicide narrative. He added that after public protest over the initial findings, a second inquiry was conducted, but the conclusion remained unchanged.
The bench sought clarification from the State on why the autopsy and ADR reports had not been given to the father since the incident. Justice Dangre observed that the petitioner needed to provide a chronological list of events and circumstances that constitute a cognisable offence, allowing the State to respond to each point.
When the petitioner's counsel mentioned that information related to the case was available in media reports, the bench questioned the reliance on media for case details. The court noted that the petition must stand on its own merits and not on media coverage.
The case has been scheduled for further hearing. The High Court's intervention is significant as it puts pressure on the police to provide a reasoned explanation for not registering an FIR, a legal right of any complainant who alleges a cognisable offence. The Salian family has consistently maintained that Disha's death was not a suicide, and they have sought a thorough investigation into the circumstances surrounding it.
The case is being closely watched as it involves a high-profile death that occurred days before the death of actor Sushant Singh Rajput, which itself led to widespread public scrutiny and multiple investigations. However, the court's role is limited to ensuring due process is followed, and it has not made any determination on the merits of the allegations.
