Bombay High Court Calls for CBI Investigation into Disha Salian’s Death
The Bombay High Court has mandated the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to take over the investigation into the 2020 death of Disha Salian, a well-known celebrity manager. This decision was announced on Wednesday by a Division Bench comprising Justices Sarang V. Kotwal and Ranjitsinha R. Bhonsale, who instructed the CBI to file a First Information Report (FIR) drawing from a complaint by Satish Salian, Disha’s father. The case is cited as Satish Salian v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
The court has further ordered the Joint Director of the CBI’s Mumbai Region to assign a senior and experienced officer to capture the petitioner’s statement and formalize the FIR. It was clarified by the Bench that initiating an FIR does not equate to declaring anyone guilty. “No person shall be considered an accused unless the investigation officer, based on the gathered evidence, finds substantial grounds for suspicion,” the Bench emphasized.
Disha Salian’s tragic demise occurred on June 8, 2020, following her fall from the 14th floor of a residential tower in Mumbai’s suburbs. Initially, the Mumbai Police had categorized her death as a suicide through an Accidental Death Report (ADR) in 2021. However, the case was reopened in 2023 due to public speculation, leading Satish Salian to approach the High Court in 2024, contending misleading and coercive behavior from authorities and politicians urging him to accept the suicide conclusion.
Satish Salian’s petition demanded an independent CBI investigation and the registration of an FIR against several individuals, including MLA Aaditya Thackeray, alleging gang rape and murder. He also accused the authorities of withholding crucial forensic and investigative documents from the family. The High Court, acknowledging the petition, ordered the Mumbai police to provide all relevant case files and evidence to the CBI investigator. It instructed the CBI to thoroughly probe all circumstances surrounding the death, with the stipulation to present an appropriate report to the competent court—either filing charges if offenses are confirmed or a closure report if not.
The court had earlier scrutinized the legal foundation of conducting a prolonged inquiry under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) without filing an FIR per Section 154 CrPC. “Your actions essentially amount to an investigation, which Section 174 does not authorize, as it does not permit issuing clean chits or summaries. Upon receiving delayed allegations, authorities should have formally registered an offense, conducted an investigation, and reached a conclusion backed by legal authority,” the court remarked previously.
More Read
Chief Public Prosecutor Shishir Hiray defended the process, asserting that witness testimonies and forensic analyses dismissed suspicions of foul play or sexual assault. He noted that while the initial ADR inquiry concluded within three months, it was reopened in 2023 due to social media-driven claims. The court expressed substantial concern regarding the absence of legal provisions for such extended inquiries. “What legal provision allows an inquiry after three months when no CrPC clause supports it? Section 174, in this context, is meaningless as it cannot exonerate anyone,” the court added.
Appearing for MLA Aaditya Thackeray, Senior Advocate Sudeep Pasbola argued that the writ petition filed under Article 226 was not sustainable and that Satish Salian should have pursued alternative statutory remedies before appealing to the High Court. He also contended that the petition was politically motivated, suggesting that Salian was “being used as a tool” and “leveraging a complaint driven by media’s irresponsible reporting.”
The court concluded by emphasizing its commitment to upholding legal processes to provide genuine closure to the bereaved family, thereby directing the CBI to proceed with the investigation.
