The Bombay High Court has raised critical questions regarding the procedural legality of the investigation into Disha Salian's death, emphasizing the need for lawful closure for her grieving father.

  • The Bombay High Court scrutinized the legal basis for reopening the Disha Salian inquiry under Section 174 of the CrPC.
  • Significant lapses were noted, including the absence of CCTV footage and deviations from autopsy protocols.
  • The court emphasized that political allegations should not overshadow the pursuit of a lawful investigation.

The Bombay High Court on Thursday expressed serious concerns regarding the handling of the investigation into the death of Disha Salian. A bench comprising Justices S.V. Kotwal and R.R. Bhonsale, while hearing a petition filed by her father, Satish Salian, questioned the procedural integrity of the inquiry conducted by the Maharashtra authorities.

Legal Ambiguities in the Inquiry

The court focused heavily on the Accidental Death Report (ADR) conducted under Section 174 of the CrPC. The bench raised concerns about why the inquiry, which had been accepted in February 2021, was reopened in December 2023. "How did you restart? Where does it say under section 174 CrPC? There is a grey area," the court observed, questioning the legal sanctity of a probe that had been ongoing for years without conclusive results.

Read Also:Former Milwaukee Tool Employee Sentenced to Prison for $1 Million Tool Theft

The judges remarked that if an investigation lacks legal standing, it becomes a "waste," as such proceedings cannot serve as conclusive evidence during a criminal trial. This scrutiny highlights a significant gap in how long-standing accidental death inquiries are managed and revisited.

Why This Matters

BozokMedia analysis shows that this case serves as a litmus test for the accountability of investigative agencies. When procedural lapses—such as missing forensic evidence or improper autopsy protocols—occur in high-profile cases, it undermines the public's confidence in the criminal justice system's ability to deliver finality.

"The court's focus remains steadfast on the investigation itself, ensuring that a father's quest for justice is not derailed by procedural mismanagement."

Beyond the legal technicalities, the court highlighted physical discrepancies at the crime scene. There was a noted absence of direct CCTV footage from the location of the fall, and inconsistencies were found in witness statements regarding a locked door. Furthermore, the court pointed out that state guidelines require autopsies in such circumstances to be conducted by two doctors, whereas in Salian's case, only one doctor was reportedly present.

Historical Background

Disha Salian passed away on June 8, 2020, following a fall from a residential building in Mumbai. She was known to be the manager of the late actor Sushant Singh Rajput. Her father, Satish Salian, has long alleged that her death was not an accident but a result of gang rape and murder, prompting his legal battle for an FIR and a thorough investigation.

Did You Know?: Section 174 of the CrPC mandates an inquiry by the police into the apparent cause of unnatural or suspicious deaths.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What was the primary concern of the Bombay High Court?
The court was concerned with the legal authority to reopen the inquiry and the procedural lapses during the initial investigation.

2. Who is Satish Salian?
He is the father of Disha Salian and the petitioner seeking a proper legal investigation and the registration of an FIR.