‘Same govt had closed the case’: Supriya questions fresh CBI probe into Disha’s death

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has registered a First Information Report (FIR) into the death of Disha Salian, a former manager of late actor Sushant Singh Rajput. The move has raised more questions than answers, particularly for NCP leader Supriya Sule.

The FIR does not name any individual as an accused, following the Bombay High Court’s directions to conduct a thorough investigation. However, advocate Nilesh Ojha claims that the FIR contains the names of several individuals, including Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Aaditya Thackeray and others. The CBI has not publicly confirmed these allegations.

The case was initially treated as closed by the same government, which has now reopened it. Supriya Sule’s claim that the government had earlier closed the case only to reopen it now is a valid concern. It remains unclear what motivated this change of heart or whether there is any substance to Ojha’s allegations.

The Disha Salian case is not an isolated incident, as the CBI’s handling of high-profile cases has been a subject of controversy in recent years. The agency’s decision to register an FIR into Sushant Singh Rajput’s death, concluding that he died by suicide, was met with skepticism by many. The fact that the CBI later submitted a closure report remains pending before the competent court.

The Bombay High Court’s direction for a thorough investigation is a welcome development in this case. However, it is essential to ensure that the probe is conducted impartially and without external pressure or influence. Central agencies should not be seen as attempting to politicize cases or settle scores with political opponents.

As the investigation unfolds, one thing is certain: only when the probe is allowed to run its course unimpeded by external factors will the truth behind Disha Salian’s death come out. The court’s intervention and the CBI’s FIR are steps in the right direction, but much more needs to be done to ensure justice for Disha Salian’s family.

The case highlights the need for greater transparency and accountability in high-profile investigations. Central agencies’ involvement should be subject to scrutiny, and their role in such cases should be clearly defined. The government’s handling of sensitive cases has often been criticized for being opaque and inconsistent.

Supriya Sule’s concerns about the CBI’s motives are also reflective of a broader issue: the public’s trust in central agencies is fragile at best. When high-profile cases like Disha Salian’s death are reopened, it raises questions about the government’s intentions and the role of central agencies in such investigations.

The truth behind Disha Salian’s death will only be revealed if justice is allowed to run its course unimpeded by external factors. The CBI must remain impartial and allow the probe to unfold without external pressure or influence.