A Delhi-based lawyer has asked the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate the death of actor Sushant Singh Rajput, citing several police mistakes when he urged the need for people's trust in the judicial system to restore.
Ishkaran Singh Bhandari, who leads the "popular movement" for justice, said that Sushant Singh Rajput's death should be treated as a "mysterious death" until the facts of the CBI are established.
The 34-year-old actor was found dead in his Mumbai apartment in June this year. The police said he died of suicide.
Watch: "Sushant changed 50 SIM cards", other missing links for the CBI probe
Several people, including Rajput's close friend Rhea Chakraborty, have requested a CBI investigation into his death. Actor Shekhar Suman and Bharatiya Janata Party's MP, Subramanian Swamy, were also among those who requested a CBI investigation.
However, Maharashtra's Interior Minister Anil Deshmukh has ruled out requests for a CBI investigation in this case. Deshmukh said the Mumbai police were able to handle the case.
Bhandari said the word "suicide came in within minutes of his death and that became a defining narrative across the media."
"The normal thing is to call it a mysterious death, investigate it, and after examining it, you can conclude that it is a tragedy, suicide, or a malicious murder," he said.
"But how do you come to this conclusion in a few minutes? That means you have a predetermined conclusion. That made me do it. After that, the more I looked into it, the more the questions grew, ”he added.
The lawyer cited "mistakes" on the part of the police and other aspects that Rajput allegedly changed 50 SIM cards on his phone. He said he wrote to the Mumbai police about these aspects, which is investigating the actor's death.
“In the first letter, I said there was source-based, not even source-based, name-based information that Sushant Singh Rajput changed his SIM cards 50 times. I wrote to them and asked if they had set all of these SIM cards, the electronic evidence from everyone, and the electronic evidence from people who happened to be connected to him. It's easy, ”he said.
"That is an extraordinarily high number, and that's why I wrote that this evidence needs to be sealed. If the Mumbai police hopefully investigated it, they would have done it already. If they didn't, it is raising more and more questions ", he said.
He said he also asked if they sealed the apartment and conducted a forensic search citing "reports in reliable mainstream media" that they did after a day after Rajput's death.
“This is very surprising and a very blatant process because we all know that evidence can be contaminated. In fact, they say that even family pets should not be in the room after an event, since even a pet can contaminate a scene and leave people alone. Why was this basic thing not done and I wrote them a letter saying at the end of the day that justice is about public trust. Law and order is also about public trust, ”he said.
Bhandari pointed out that no one came forward to say that the police followed the procedures.
"These statements do not come and the verdicts of the country's highest courts, the Supreme Court, state that public trust is an integral part of the judicial system and also where influential people are involved," he said.
Police said they recorded the testimony of dozens of people, including his family, friends, co-stars and close aides, in the Maharashtra government-ordered investigation into the actor's death on June 14.
He also said it took the police days to record statements by "celebrities" related to the case.
“Everyone who is interviewed is by definition an influential person, by definition a person with resources and sources, by definition a person who is close to all administrations. So it has to come from the local police to avoid conflicts of interest and it has to be a central authority, ”he stressed.
The lawyer pointed out "the old maxim of the law that justice is not only done, but should be seen as done".
“So that has to go to CBI. In this case there are also errors. I also say without a mistake, this was a case that should have gone to CBI. "
“The Maharashtra government will be a best practice from a central authority. If not, you may have to go to court and because in this case people need satisfaction and the satisfaction that justice and transparent justice are being done. "