Disha Salian’s father, Satish Salian, has approached the Bombay High Court seeking deletion or clarification of a clause stating that no one can be treated as an accused until reasonable suspicion emerges. The plea comes after the CBI began investigating Disha’s death following the court’s direction to register an FIR.
Satish Salian, father of deceased celebrity manager Disha Salian, has approached the Bombay High Court seeking deletion of a clause stating that “nobody shall be treated as an accused until reasonable suspicion” in the order passed by the court while directing the CBI to register an FIR and investigate the case.
Salian’s plea, filed through advocate Nilesh Ojha, seeks deletion or, alternatively, clarification or modification of Clause (iv) of the order dated September 2, which states:
“Nobody shall be treated as an accused unless in the opinion of the Investigating Officer there are sufficient grounds to raise reasonable suspicion against him.”
Salian alleged that the direction of the High Court is “causing serious prejudice” to him and is allegedly being misused by the accused persons. He also said it has created considerable confusion, thereby causing serious prejudice to him, and has sought clarification on the issue.
Salian’s contention is that the interpretation of the clause is contrary to the settled legal position regarding when a person can be regarded as an “accused of an offence”.
The local police, as well as an independent SIT constituted by the BJP-led government, had conducted an enquiry into the possible causes of Disha’s death and concluded that she had died by suicide.
However, Satish Salian had maintained that it was a case of murder while linking it to the case of actor Sushant Singh Rajput.
While the CBI had filed for closure in the Rajput case, it has only now begun investigating the Disha Salian case after an FIR was registered.
The High Court had questioned the Maharashtra government over procedural lapses and suspicious circumstances surrounding the investigation, emphasising that a “grieving father will not get closure” without a lawful probe.
