Disha Salian’s case unaffected by Sushant Singh closure report, says lawyer

Disha Salian died after allegedly falling from the 14th floor of a building in Malad. File pic

Following the closure report in the Sushant Singh Rajput case by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), filed after four and a half years, the petition filed by Disha Salian's father, Satish Salian, before the Bombay High Court is facing backlash. The petition, filed five years after Disha's death, alleges that she was murdered and that her death is linked to Rajput's, claiming both were killed in a similar manner.

The CBI's closure report stated that there was no foul play involved in Rajput's death. Advocate Nilesh Ojha, representing Disha's father, clarified that the closure report does not have any bearing on the gang rape and death case of Disha.

Addressing supports of Rajput, Ojha said, "Warm greetings to all of you who have relentlessly stood for truth, justice, and accountability in the case of the mysterious deaths of our beloved Sushant Singh Rajput and Disha Salian. Today, news has surfaced that the CBI has filed a closure report in the Sushant Singh Rajput death case. Firstly, this news is yet to be confirmed by the CBI."

Nilesh Ojha, Satish Salian's lawyer

He continued, "Even if it is true, this development has caused disappointment, confusion, and a sense of betrayal among many supporters and citizens who have fought for a fair and thorough investigation."

Talking about the legal aspects, he said, "A closure report filed by any investigative agency, including the CBI, does not amount to acquittal or final disposal of the case. Its acceptance depends entirely upon judicial scrutiny and the satisfaction of the court. In fact, the Indian judiciary has time and again rejected closure reports and directed further investigation or even proceeded to take cognisance of the offences despite the closure plea."

Ojha further assured supporters, saying, "Let me assure you all that we are not at the end of the road. On the contrary, this is just another legal hurdle that we are prepared to tackle with full force. We are filing a protest petition before the court challenging the closure report, seeking further investigation by another agency or SIT under judicial supervision, initiating prosecution against CBI officials under sections 218, 192, 193, and 120(B) of the IPC for dereliction of duty, suppression of material facts, or filing a false and misleading report before the court. We will also continue the legal battle for an independent inquiry into larger conspiracies, custodial interference, and procedural lapses."

He emphasised that even if the two cases are interconnected in certain aspects, they nonetheless constitute distinct and serious criminal offences.

"As per the well-established principles of criminal jurisprudence, each case must be investigated, assessed, and adjudicated independently, based exclusively on the evidence available in that particular case," he said.

Ojha reiterated that the alleged closure report - assuming it pertains to the Sushant Singh Rajput case - has no bearing whatsoever, nor does it confer any legal advantage upon the accused persons.