High Court Orders CBI Probe into Disha Salian Case Over 6-Year Inquiry Delays
Disha Salian case – Order for CBI Investigation for Glaring Discrepancies and Prolonged Police Inquiry
Judgment dated 2.9.2026 of the High Court of Bombay in Criminal Writ Petition No.1612 of 2025 of Satih Salian Vs. State of Maharashtra and others with connected matters.
In all ten circumstances / grounds were given in the judgment to hand over investigation to the CBI.
- Uploaded on – 02/09/2026 The Police Officers are required to conclude the investigation under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. at the earliest to see whether registration of FIR is necessary. This is necessary to ensure that the evidence, if any, is not destroyed or does not disappear due to passage of time. The investigation cannot go on for an inordinately long time. In the present case, the investigation was carried out in two stages and it went on for about six years. This is not the object of investigation under Section 174 of Cr.P.C.. The investigation carried out by the police raises more questions than it answers. Therefore, investigation by CBI is necessary in this case.
If the deceased had fallen on her face from 12th floor, then it is difficult to accept that there was only one injury of the size 1 x 1 x 1 cm in the nature of CLW over the chin. Not a single facial bone was fractured. There was neither fracture of mandible nor even of nasal bone which is quite delicate. We find this difficult to accept. This, of course, would be subject to expert’s opinion.
Thus, we find that there are too many glaring discrepancies which necessitated proper and substantive investigation under the provisions of Sections 154 to 173 of Cr.P.C.. That was not done in the present case. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that this case deserves registration of FIR and investigation in a cognizable offence.
In this particular case, we are of the opinion that the police had sufficient opportunity to investigate the offence but they have not registered the FIR and have not carried out the investigation of a cognizable offence. Instead, they conducted investigation under the provisions of Section 174 of Cr.P.C.. which according to us was inadequate and insufficient in the facts of the present case.
