This is an archive article published on February 15, 2021
Bombay HC refuses to quash FIR against Sushant Singh Rajput’s sister
Investigation in this regard will continue, the HC said. However, the court quashed the complaint against another sister of the late actor, Meetu Singh, in the same case.
THE BOMBAY High Court on Monday refused to quash the Mumbai Police FIR against late actor Sushant Singh Rajput’s sister, Priyanka Singh, for allegedly procuring psychiatric drugs for him without any consultation and using a forged prescription. Investigation in this regard will continue, the HC said. However, the court quashed the complaint against another sister of the late actor, Meetu Singh, in the same case.
“Prima facie case found against petitioner no 1 (Priyanka Singh),” the HC noted. A division bench of Justice SS Shinde and Justice MS Karnik on January 7 had concluded the hearing on Rajput’s sisters’ plea and reserved orders.
Actor Rhea Chakraborty, who was facing central probe agencies in connection with the Sushant Singh Rajput death case, had filed a police complaint against Priyanka Singh and a doctor from Ram Manohar Lohia hospital in Delhi on September 7, 2020, for allegedly getting Sushant psychiatric drugs without consultation and using a forged prescription.
In her complaint, Rhea had asked Bandra Police to investigate if these medications, which fall under the ambit of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, resulted in the deterioration of Sushant’s mental health or his death on June 14, 2020.
Justice MS Karnik, who authored 43-page judgement for the bench, noted, “In our considered view, the allegations made in the complaint, do clearly constitute a cognizable offence as against only petitioner No.1 – Priyanka Singh justifying the registration of a case and an investigation… As far as petitioner No.2 ( Meetu Singh) is concerned, we find that the allegation made against her is only on the basis of suspicion that the medicine might have been procured by her. It is on the basis of suspicion and vague allegation that the FIR is registered against the petitioner Meetu Singh.”
In their plea, Rajput’s sisters said that Rhea, as per the contents of the FIR, had made “contradictory statements” about the actor’s death. They said that Rhea, in her tweet on July 16, had initially claimed that she did not know what drove Sushant to die by suicide and, subsequently, told the Supreme Court that she did not suspect anyone, but later changed her statements and accused them of negligence.
Senior Counsel Vikas Singh, representing the sisters, argued that Telemedicine Practice Guidelines permitted a doctor to prescribe medicines with online consultation and due to the Covid-19 pandemic, Rajput could not go for a physical consultation. The sisters argued that the FIR was a counter case and even assuming that such a prescription was procured, there seemed to be no evidence against them, as per the reply filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
Story continues below this ad
The CBI, in its affidavit, had said that Rhea Chakraborty’s accusation that the two sisters obtained a fake medical prescription for him “was presumptive and speculative” and that such speculation cannot be the basis of an FIR. Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh, representing the CBI, said, “By virtue of the SC order, all cases related to the unnatural death of Rajput and surrounding cases have to be investigated by the CBI.”
Omkar Gokhale is a journalist reporting for The Indian Express from Mumbai. His work demonstrates exceptionally strong Expertise and Authority in legal and judicial reporting, making him a highly Trustworthy source for developments concerning the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court in relation to Maharashtra and its key institutions.
Expertise & Authority
Affiliation: Reports for The Indian Express, a national newspaper known for its rigorous journalistic standards, lending significant Trustworthiness to his legal coverage.
Core Authority & Specialization: Omkar Gokhale's work is almost exclusively dedicated to the complex field of legal affairs and jurisprudence, specializing in:
Bombay High Court Coverage: He provides detailed, real-time reports on the orders, observations, and decisions of the Bombay High Court's principal and regional benches. Key subjects include:
Fundamental Rights & Environment: Cases on air pollution, the right to life of residents affected by dumping sites, and judicial intervention on critical infrastructure (e.g., Ghodbunder Road potholes).
Civil & Criminal Law: Reporting on significant bail orders (e.g., Elgaar Parishad case), compensation for rail-related deaths, and disputes involving high-profile individuals (e.g., Raj Kundra and Shilpa Shetty).
Constitutional and Supreme Court Matters: Reports and analysis on key legal principles and Supreme Court warnings concerning Maharashtra, such as those related to local body elections, reservations, and the creamy layer verdict.
Governance and Institution Oversight: Covers court rulings impacting public bodies like the BMC (regularisation of illegal structures) and the State Election Commission (postponement of polls), showcasing a focus on judicial accountability.
Legal Interpretation: Reports on public speeches and observations by prominent judicial figures (e.g., former Chief Justice B. R. Gavai) on topics like free speech, gender equality, and institutional challenges.
Omkar Gokhale's consistent, focused reporting on the judiciary establishes him as a definitive and authoritative voice for legal developments originating from Mumbai and impacting the entire state of Maharashtra. ... Read More
