Tribune News Service
New Delhi, August 11
The Supreme Court on Tuesday reserved its order on actor Rhea Chakraborty’s plea for switch of an FIR lodged towards her in Patna in reference to the demise of Sushant Singh Rajput, who was allegedly discovered hanging at his Bandra residence in Mumbai on June 14.
A Bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy reserved its order after listening to a marathon of arguments from advocates representing Rhea, Sushant’s father, governments of Maharashtra and Bihar and the CBI. It requested the events to file their written submissions, if any, by Thursday.
During the listening to, the Maharashtra and Bihar governments traded costs over the probe into Sushant Singh Rajput’s unnatural demise, with every accusing the opposite of exerting political interference.
Under the probe within the case, Rhea additionally expressed apprehension of bias, saying there was a substantial quantity of state interference.
Senior advocate Vikas Singh, representing Sushant’s father KK Singh, defended the Bihar authorities’s determination at hand over the probe to the CBI.
“The larger picture is that I lost my son. Mumbai Police doesn’t listen to me and took the probe to a completely different direction. My daughter was allowed to enter after my son’s body was reportedly brought down. Nobody in my family has seen his body hanging,” Singh instructed the Bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy.
He mentioned the court docket ought to put its seal of approval on the CBI probe, which was additionally demanded by Rhea someday again.
On behalf of the CBI, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta mentioned: “The only pending investigation is in Bihar. Whether it is valid or not is not something that can be decided in a transfer petition.”
Mehta identified that the affidavit filed by the Mumbai police had used the phrase “investigation” with out registering an FIR below the CrPC.
“If it was just an inquest, there can’t be an investigation,” Mehta mentioned, including, an inquest continuing couldn’t be an alternative choice to an investigation.
Mehta additionally questioned the Mumbai police’s determination to summon 56 individuals and file their statements. “They can’t do it under an inquest proceeding and they never lodged an FIR to investigate,” he mentioned, including the statements have been recorded unauthorised.
Contending that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) was already investigating the matter, Mehta mentioned: “Once one central agency has registered a case, another central agency (CBI) should be involved.”
He added: “The affidavit by the Mumbai police shows a foregone conclusion that it was a suicide… Truth has to be elicited. An investigation must take place and it has to be fair, extensive and truth-eliciting. We don’t know if the petitioner (Rhea) is a witness, an accused, a complainant or a nobody in this case… but we can say that no case was pending in Mumbai when she filed her petition for transfer of the case in Patna,” Mehta mentioned.
But earlier than Vikas Singh and Mehta made their submissions, senior advocate Maninder Singh, representing the Bihar authorities and senior advocate AM Singhvi, showing for the Maharashtra authorities, indulged in a authorized slugfest over the course of the investigation into the case.
Senior advocate Shyam Divan instructed the court docket on behalf of Rhea that there was not only a appreciable delay in submitting the FIR, there was additionally state intrude within the case.
He mentioned the Bihar FIR was registered on the behest of the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh and no honest probe might occur on the occasion of the Bihar police.
The prime court docket is seized of Rhea’s petition in search of switch of the Patna FIR to Mumbai. In her affidavit filed on Monday, she had opposed the switch of the FIR registered in Patna towards her by Sushant’s father to the CBI, saying she was being made “scapegoat of political agendas”.
the Bihar authorities and Sushant’s father have opposed her plea, saying her petition has turn into infructuous after the CBI took over the probe.
Sushant’s father has additionally accused Rhea Chakraborty of giving drug overdose to Sushant. The Maharashtra authorities has opposed the registration of FIR by Bihar police and its subsequent switch to the CBI.
Rhea, who had earlier demanded a CBI probe into Sushant’s unnatural demise, modified her stand on the problem.
Divan mentioned as an alternative of transferring the Patna FIR to the CBI, it ought to have been despatched to Mumbai. It was for the Maharashtra authorities to take a name on sending the matter to the central company, he added.
Maninder Singh contradicted Divan, saying: “Political pressure is in Maharashtra and not in Bihar. Mumbai police are not cooperating. What are they hiding in this case?”
Singhvi mentioned Bihar didn’t have jurisdiction within the case in any respect.
“You may have screaming headlines, screaming anchors, comments from everywhere but that does not change the law. The court should look at the law. It’s not about Mumbai police and Bihar police. It’s about federalism and jurisdiction,” Singhvi submitted. The sufferer’s household couldn’t resolve who ought to examine the case, he added.
“I have never seen this amount of sensationalism in a transfer petition. Every anchor and reporter has become an expert. Casualty is investigation and truth. I don’t know whether it was suicide but there is definite murder of the CrPC.” Singhvi mentioned.
Maninder Singh requested: “How many people were examined after June 25? The entire facade of undertaking an inquiry is entirely without jurisdiction. If you have to call anyone for an inquiry after you have filed the post-mortem report, you must register an FIR.”
Regarding Maharashtra’s allegation that Bihar filed an FIR after a delay, he mentioned: “I (Bihar) registered the only FIR in this case as soon as I received a complaint. There is no delay by Bihar…but there is a complete refusal by Maharashtra to register an FIR. Maybe there is political pressure in Maharashtra.”
He mentioned there was full non-cooperation by Mumbai police.
“No documents have been shared. A senior officer of Bihar police sent to request Mumbai Police to cooperate was s virtually put under detention in the name of quarantine,” Maninder Singh instructed the highest court docket.
But Singhvi mentioned the submitting of a autopsy report didn’t finish the inquiry.
“Can I transfer something that I don’t own? Bihar is extremely generous in transferring something that it has no jurisdiction over,” Singhvi mentioned.
Referring to Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, he pointed on the market was no consent of Maharashtra the place the incident occurred.
“The only exception to state consent is if and when the Supreme Court of India comes to a conclusion that there are ‘extraordinary circumstances’, then the Supreme Court can transfer investigation,” Singhvi added.