New Delhi:The Supreme Court will on Wednesday pronounce the verdict on a petition filed by actress Rhea Chakraborty seeking transfer of the case filed in connection with Sushant Singh Rajput’s death from Patna to Mumbai.
Justice Hrishikesh Roy will pronounce the verdict at 11 a.m. The transfer petition filed by Rhea has been opposed by the Bihar government and Sushant Singh’s father K.K. Singh.
The Bihar government in its submission to the apex court said, “It is apparent that it is on account of political pressure in the State of Maharashtra that neither the FIR has been registered by the Mumbai Police nor did they extend any cooperation to Bihar Police in discharging their obligation to conduct investigation expeditiously.”
The Centre has sought the apex court’s nod for investigation into the case by the CBI and ED. The Centre told the apex court that the CBI has already registered an FIR while acceding to the request made by the Bihar government.
Rhea in her written submissions had told the Supreme Court that the Patna FIR could at best be regarded as a zero FIR and should be transferred to Mumbai police and insisted that Rajput’s father has made baseless allegations against her. “A plain reading of the subject FIR is clearly indicative of the fact that no such consequence of such alleged act has ensued within the State of Bihar.
The maximum that may be done in such instance, is for the FIR to be registered as a ‘Zero FIR’ and the same may be forwarded to the Police Station having jurisdiction over the matter”, said Rhea in the written submissions.
Sushant Singh Rajput’s father K.K. Singh has informed the Supreme Court that Rhea has already begun to influence witnesses connected with the case and took a U-turn on a CBI probe.
Singh in the affidavit said the mail relied upon by Rhea raises a question if the email was sent by Siddharth Pithani to Mumbai Police, and asked why was the same shared by the potential witness with Rhea, who is a prime suspect in the case.
“Nevertheless, the email is sent after the registration of the FIR and one day before the filing of the present transfer petition and thus the said email seems to be procured by the petitioner (Rhea) from the potential witness, who seems to be already under her influence”, said the affidavit filed through advocate Nitin Saluja.
Singh’s counsel had argued that Rhea too wanted a CBI probe into the matter, and questioned why she was against it now.
“Moreover, as stated in the Petition that the Petitioner (Rhea) through her social media platform had requested the Union Home Minister for a CBI inquiry and now since the Respondent No.1 (Bihar government) has entrusted the aforesaid FIR to the CBI and Union of India has accepted the said request of the Respondent No.1, the Petitioner should not have any grievance in this regard”.
Rhea contended that the investigations in Bihar are totally illegal and such illegal proceedings cannot be transferred to CBI in the present manner by way of illegal executive orders.
“The Petitioner has no objection if the transfer of investigation to CBI is done in exercise of powers conferred upon this court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. Otherwise, the present transfer from Bihar Police to CBI as is done is totally without jurisdiction and contrary to law,” said the written submission.
The Solicitor General, representing the Centre, had argued it is a fit case for a CBI inquiry. Mehta questioned how Mumbai Police summoned 56 persons and recorded their statements, as they cannot do it under inquest proceedings. He submitted before the court that Mumbai Police never registered an FIR to investigate.
He insisted that the ED has already initiated investigation, and after one central agency has registered a case, another central agency (CBI) should be engaged.
