Bollywood actress Rhea Chakraborty told the Supreme Court that she does not have objection if investigation in the Sushant Singh Rajput's death case is transferred to CBI by the Court in exercise of its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution.
However, she has objected to the transfer insofar as it has been done at the behest of the Bihar Police.
"Investigations in Bihar are totally illegal and such illegal proceedings cannot be transferred to CBI in the present manner by way of illegal executive orders. The Petitioner has no objection if the transfer of investigation to CBI is done in exercise of powers conferred upon this Hon'ble 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," a written statement filed through Advocate Malak Manish Bhatt states.
The submission has come in response to the objections raised by Rajput's father, Mr. KK Singh, who claimed that Rhea's petition for transfer of the FIR registered against her in Patna, to Mumbai, has become infructuous as investigation in the matter stands entrusted to the CBI.
"The said transfer has been undertaken solely with the motive of rendering the instant petition infructuous," Rhea submitted today.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy has reserved its orders in the plea and it had granted two days time all parties to submit their written notes.
Sushant Singh's Death Being Sensationalized; Media Trial Causing Trauma : Rhea Chakraborty Tells SC
Arguing that the Bihar Police does not have jurisdiction in the matter she submitted,
"Section 177 of CrPC categorically states that the case should be investigated into and be dealt with by the court where the offence has been committed. Even on a reading of the FIR, no part of the offence has taken place in Bihar."
She stressed that since cause of action has arisen in Mumbai, only Mumbai Police has the jurisdiction to investigate Rajput's death and in case the matter is to be transferred to the CBI, consent of Maharashtra Government is necessary in terms of Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946.
"State of Bihar which ordinarily also exercised no jurisdiction to investigate the subject FIR could not have been the proper authority for providing the requisite consent as needed under the said provision," the WS states.
She has submitted that Section 179 of CrPC has been misconstrued to usurp jurisdiction in Bihar under political pressure.
Section 179 provides that when an act is an offence by reason of a consequence which has ensued, the offence may be inquired into or tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction such thing has been done or such consequence has ensued
Rhea has submitted that a plain reading of the FIR is clearly indicative of the fact that no such "consequence" of such alleged act has ensued within the State of Bihar.
Significantly, Rajput's father had claimed that the Transfer Petition is not maintainable at all since transfer of a petition can only be at post cognizance stage, that is when the matter is before a criminal Court and not at the stage of investigation i.e. when the matter is being investigated by the Police officers.
Responding to this, Rhea has submitted,
"The meaning ascribed to the word 'case' in Section 406 of CrPC cannot be restricted to 'case after cognizance' and includes 'FIR' as well.
…"the word 'case' as used within Section 406 of CrPC has been similarly used in various other provisions within CrPC including the definitions of 'cognizable offence' in Section 2(c) and 'non-cognizable offence' in Section 2(l) and in Sections 56 & 57 of CrPC which relates to pre-cognizance stage. Further, Section 156 which pertains to a police officer's power to investigate into a cognizable offence uses the term 'case'."
Rhea has also claimed that she had been wrongly implicated in the matter as a perusal of the FIR would indicate that no cognizable offence has been made out against her.
"The averments in the FIR in no manner indicate how the alleged actions of the Petitioner led to the suicide of the deceased," she has argued.
#RheaChakroborty says that the Bihar FIR does not state how her actions led to suicide of #SushantSingRajput and contains contradictory allegations.#CBIForSSR @Tweet2Rhea pic.twitter.com/YjchGeUyxk— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) August 13, 2020
#RheaChakroborty says that the Bihar FIR does not state how her actions led to suicide of #SushantSingRajput and contains contradictory allegations.#CBIForSSR @Tweet2Rhea pic.twitter.com/YjchGeUyxk
Click Here To Download Written Submission
Read Written Submission