Case Title: Rhea Chakraborty Petitioner V. State of Bihar & Ors.
The Supreme Court noted that there was no evidence to support any "wrongdoing on the side of Mumbai police" while clearing the ongoing CBI inquiry into the murder of Bollywood star Sushant Singh Rajput.
The Mumbai police conducted a "limited inquiry" under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (inquiry procedure into unnatural death), according to a single bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy, but they didn’t file an FIR under Section 154 CrPC in relation to the actor's suicide. “They may thus decide to submit an FIR and conduct an inquiry into the other features of the unnatural death” the Court stated.
The Court also disapproved of the Mumbai police's decision to isolate the Bihar police personnel, noting that this hindrance should have been avoided as it raised doubts about the sincerity of their probe.
The facts mentioned in the complaint—including the killing of Sushant Singh Rajput in Mumbai—were also noted by the court, and they did imply that the Mumbai police also held the authority to initiate an inquiry on those circumstances.
"Even though the Mumbai Police's actions were faultless, the Court ruled that the probe must be given to an independent agency not controlled by either of the two-state governments due to concerns of an unfair investigation.
"While the steps taken by the Mumbai police in the limited inquiry under Section 174 CrPC may not be faulted on the material available before this Court, considering the apprehension voiced by the stakeholders of unfair investigation, this Court must strive to ensure that search for the truth is undertaken by an independent agency, not controlled by either of the two state governments. Most importantly, the credibility of the investigation and the investigating authority must be protected", the Court said.
In ruling on the actor Rhea Chakraborty's request, to transfer the FIR filed by the Bihar police to Mumbai, who is accused of aiding and abetting Sushant Singh's suicide, the Court made these observations.
The bench declared that "the legitimacy of the probe has fallen under a shadow since both governments are making contentious charges of political influence against one other." This was used as justification for invoking Article 142, which led to the decision that the case called for a CBI probe.
The petitioner, Rhea Chakraborty, had no problem with the CBI conducting a probe, but the court noted that she is sceptical about the sincerity of the actions taken by the Bihar government and the Patna police.
“Against such a backdrop, to ensure public confidence in the investigation and to do complete justice in the matter, this Court considers it appropriate to invoke the powers conferred by Article 142 of the Constitution. As a Court exercising lawful jurisdiction for the assigned roster, no impediment is seen for the exercise of a plenary power in the present matter.”
Therefore, while giving approval for the ongoing CBI investigation, the court relied upon Arnab Ranjan Goswami vs. Union of India, Lalita Kumari Vs. Govt. of UP and Monica Kumar (Dr.) and Anr. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others stating that if any other case is registered on the death of the actor Sushant Singh Rajput and the surrounding circumstances of his unnatural death, the CBI is directed to investigate the new case as well.