No objection if CBI takes over Sushant case: Rhea
NEW DELHI: Actor Rhea Chakraborty told the Supreme Court on Thursday that she has no objection if the probe into the death of her late boyfriend, actor Sushant Singh Rajput, is transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) by the court, but argued that the Bihar police did not have jurisdictional power to initiate such a move.
“The petitioner (Rhea Chakraborty) 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,” her submissions said.
Article 142 of the Constitution vests the Supreme Court with the powers to pass orders to ensure complete justice, in any case, it is hearing.
The Supreme Court on August 11 reserved its verdict on Chakraborty’s plea seeking transfer of the case registered against her in connection with Rajput’s death from Patna to Mumbai. The case was transferred to the CBI this month after a turf battle between the Bihar and Mumbai police.
Rajput, 34, was found dead in his apartment in Mumbai’s Bandra on June 14. The Mumbai police found the cause of death to be “asphyxia due to hanging” and filed an accidental death report (ADR), but is yet to register an FIR in connection with the death.
Rajput’s father, KK Singh, approached the Bihar police on July 25 accusing Chakraborty of abetting Rajput’s suicide. Chakraborty was in a live-in relationship with Rajput for a year until she shifted to her house on June 8. Patna police registered an FIR on July 25 based on Singh’s complaint; she was accused of abetment of suicide, cheating, and criminal intimidation.
Chakraborty moved the top court on July 29 challenging the jurisdiction of the Bihar police in the matter saying that the alleged crime took place in Mumbai and the power to look into the matter was with the Mumbai police. CBI took over the probe on August 5 on a request by the Bihar police.
“FIR was registered by Bihar police based on an incident which has no connection with Patna. I have apprehension of bias and fear that state interference led to Bihar police registering the case. Patna police has absolutely no jurisdiction to register a case. This case is being used for political gains,” senior counsel Shyam Divan submitted on behalf of Chakraborty during the hearing on August 11.The court, while reserving its verdict, had given the parties liberty to submit written submissions by Thursday. The Maharashtra and Bihar governments and CBI also filed their written submissions on Thursday. Maharashtra maintained that the FIR registered by Patna police was illegal and without jurisdiction. It also opposed transfer of the probe to the CBI, stating that a single judge of the Supreme Court cannot order such a move. The transfer petition was heard by a single judge bench of justice Hrishikesh Roy.
The CBI said in its written submissions that the matter cannot be transferred to Mumbai since no case is pending there and requested the court to allow the agency to continue with its probe, an argument that found support from the Bihar government.
Chakraborty, in her written submissions, continued to maintain that Bihar police have no powers to investigate the matter and the transfer of the case to CBI by Bihar police was in violation of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act.
Under Section 6 of the Act, consent of a state government is necessary for CBI to exercise jurisdiction in a case and the relevant state, in this case, is Maharashtra, she submitted.
“Thus, the consent by State of Bihar under Section 6 is bad in law and was given merely to render the present Petition infructuous (pointless),” she submitted. The Bihar government has consistently opposed Chakraborty’s plea, stating that it was acting well within its powers because the Mumbai police had not registered an FIR or conducted any probe into the matter.
“There is a complete lapse of investigation on part of the Mumbai police. Bihar’s FIR is the only FIR in the matter. The allegation is against political class in Maharashtra which has stopped even registering of FIR,” the Bihar government maintained.
CBI and Rajput’s father have also supported the Bihar government’s stance, which the Maharashtra government strongly contested, stating that the death took place in Mumbai and the jurisdiction to probe the matter was with the Mumbai police.
Senior counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing the Maharashtra government, contended on August 11 that allowing Bihar police to probe an incident which happened in Mumbai will be in the teeth of the principles of federalism, under which law and order fall within the domain of a state where the cause of action arose. “Murder of the Crpc is being attempted in this case, where jurisdiction is a casualty. If this is allowed, it will be a fundamental assault on federalism. I have not seen so much sensationalism attached to a transfer petition,” Singhvi argued.
CONTEMPT OF COURT