The Bombay High Court questioned the Mumbai Police over its failure to register a First Information Report on the complaint filed by Satish Salian, father of the late Disha Salian, despite the complaint disclosing cognizable offences of gang rape and murder.
A Division Bench comprising Justices Bharti Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande also raised questions regarding the apparent inconsistencies between Disha Salian’s post-mortem report and the photographs placed before the Court.
During the hearing, the Bench reportedly noted that the photographs did not appear to show facial injuries that would ordinarily be expected if a person had fallen from the 14th floor of a residential building.
Counsel appearing for Satish Salian alleged that the post-mortem report recorded that all of Disha’s teeth were broken. However, the photographs showed that her teeth were intact. This proves falsity of the post-mortem findings & dishonesty of Police.
Counsel also referred to the Mansukh Hiren case and alleged that a false Post Mortem report had initially been created by police officer Sachin Vaze, which was subsequently exposed during the investigation conducted by the National Investigation Agency. He urged the Court that similar manipulation had occurred in the present case.
Disha Salian died on June 8, 2020, after allegedly falling from the 14th floor of a residential building in the Malad area of Mumbai. The Mumbai Police thereafter registered an Accidental Death Report and initiated an inquiry into the circumstances surrounding her death.
Following the inquiry, the police concluded that Disha had died by suicide. However, her father, Satish Salian, subsequently approached the Bombay High Court, alleging that his daughter had been gang-raped and murdered and since accused are influential people like Aditya Thackeray, therefore, Police created bogus report to save him. He sought registration of an FIR and transfer of the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation.
When the petition came up for hearing on Monday, the High Court questioned why the police had continued to treat the matter merely as an accidental death inquiry instead of registering an FIR and conducting a full investigation.
The Bench reportedly asked:
“When victim’s father, raises suspicion about the circumstances in which the death occurred, what stopped the police from registering an FIR and investigating it?”
Public Prosecutor Shishir Hiray informed the Court that the matter had been treated as an accidental death case from the outset. He submitted that the police had conducted inquiries on two occasions and had concluded on both occasions that Disha’s death was a case of suicide.
Satish Salian’s counsel, Advocate Nilesh Ojha, strongly disputed the police findings and alleged that the inquiry reports were false, incomplete and inconsistent with the available forensic material.
Advocate Ojha relied upon a forensic report prepared by Dr. Bhupinder Sharma and pointed out that petitioner had placed photographs and other material before the Court. After examining the photographs and the forensic report, the Bench raised pointed questions regarding the absence of any visible injuries ordinarily associated with a fall from such a height.
Justice Dangre reportedly asked:
“If a person falls from a height of 14 floors, wouldn’t there be injuries on the body?”
In response, the Public Prosecutor submitted that the photographs of the deceased showed injuries to the head.
Advocate Ojha disputed this submission. He alleged that the photographs initially shown to Satish Salian by the police did not depict such injuries. He further alleged that photographs showing head injuries had subsequently been fabricated or digitally altered.
The High Court also questioned the police over their failure to provide important documents and reports relating to the accidental death inquiry, including the Accidental Death Report, to Disha’s father.
The Bench observed that the police themselves claimed that no FIR had been registered and that no criminal investigation was pending. In such circumstances, the Court questioned why the inquiry report and the related documents had not been supplied to the deceased’s father.
Advocate Ojha also alleged that Disha’s fiancé, Rohan Rai, was involved in the alleged conspiracy. He claimed that Disha had been taken away from her residence and brought to the Malad flat as part of a pre-planned conspiracy to kill her.
Counsel further alleged that the different and allegedly contradictory versions given by Rohan Rai raised serious suspicion regarding his role and the circumstances preceding Disha’s death.
Advocate Ojha also relied upon an scene-recreation exercise conducted in relation to the incident. According to him, the police claimed that Disha had died after jumping from the 14th floor. However, her body was allegedly found approximately 20 feet away from the building.
He submitted that technical experts, including persons associated with the Indian Institutes of Technology, had opined that the police version was physically improbable. According to the petitioner, if Disha had simply fallen or jumped from the building, her body would ordinarily have landed substantially closer to the base of the structure.
Counsel alleged that the scene-recreation exercise contradicted the police theory and demonstrated that the body could not have landed at the location where it was allegedly found in the manner claimed by the police.
He further alleged that the scene-recreation report had subsequently been deleted, removed or withheld from the police record. The Court reportedly expressed concern after hearing this submission.
The Bench has posted the matter for further hearing on August 24 at 3:00 p.m. for final hearing.
In his petition, Satish Salian has sought registration of an FIR, an independent investigation by the CBI and appropriate action against the persons allegedly involved in his daughter’s death. The petition also seeks registration of an FIR against Shiv Sena (UBT) MLA Aaditya Thackeray.
Satish Salian has alleged that his daughter died under mysterious circumstances on June 8, 2020. He claims that she was gang-raped and murdered and that a politically orchestrated cover-up was subsequently carried out to protect influential individuals.
Disha Salian worked as a celebrity manager. She had also previously been associated professionally with actor Sushant Singh Rajput, who died on June 14, 2020, six days after Disha’s death.
Advocate Ojha further alleged that Disha possessed material and evidence concerning an alleged drug network of Aditya Thackeray and others. According to him, her death was not connected to Sushant Singh Rajput in the manner commonly portrayed.
He alleged that Disha was deliberately separated from her family, taken to the Malad flat, gang-raped and murdered pursuant to a pre-planned conspiracy. He further claimed that a false story of suicide was subsequently created with the assistance of police officials, including persons allegedly connected with Sachin Vaze.
Counsel also raised serious questions regarding the timing and manner of Disha’s post-mortem examination. He submitted that Disha’s post-mortem was conducted after an unexplained delay of approximately 72 hours, whereas Sushant Singh Rajput’s post-mortem was conducted within approximately 12 hours of his death.
Advocate Ojha also alleged that Disha’s body was brought for post-mortem without clothes. He claimed that the police later created a contrary version of witnesses suggesting that clothes were present on the body.
The petitioner also relied upon mobile tower-location data and other alleged electronic evidence. Counsel claimed that Aaditya Thackeray had stated that he was out of station on the relevant date, whereas his mobile tower location allegedly placed him in or near the area where the offence was said to have occurred.
The petitioner further claims that eyewitnesses exist who allegedly witnessed the gang rape and murder. He has sought a full and independent investigation into these allegations, preservation and disclosure of all forensic and electronic evidence, and examination of the alleged eyewitnesses.
