The Bombay High Court on Wednesday ordered the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to launch a probe into the death of Disha Salian , a former manager of actor Sushant Singh Rajput.
Ordering the CBI investigation, the court slammed the Mumbai Police for treating the celebrity manager’s death as an accident for six years and said there were “glaring discrepancies” in their probe.
Here’s all you need to know about Disha Salian’s death case:
Disha Salian died on June 8, 2020, after she fell off the 14th floor of a residential building in Mumbai’s Malad area. Which filed an affidavit in the Bombay High Court in July 2025, Disha Salian had jumped off the window of a flat, and the postmortem report revealed no signs of sexual and/or physical assault on the dead, according to the police. Disha’s father, Satish Salian, had approached the Bombay High Court seeking a CBI investigation in March 2025.
“In the present case, the investigation went on for about six years. The investigation carried out by the police raises more questions than it answers. Salian’s demise eventually led to a massive clamour about foul play as Rajput died less than a week after she fell to death. The case also gained national attention as it included big names from the entertainment industry as well as the political world. At the time, Mumbai Police registered an Accidental Death Report (ADR). The death of Disha Salian, investigated by the Malvani police, was treated as suicide. He alleged that his daughter had been raped and murdered and claimed there had been an attempt to cover up the circumstances surrounding her death. He also sought an FIR against Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Aaditya Thackeray. The court did not hold any individual responsible for Salian’s death. The court also refrained from making any remarks against Aaditya Thackeray or any other person.
Therefore, an investigation by the CBI is necessary in this case,” PTI quoted the high court.
“Nobody shall be treated as an accused unless in the opinion of the investigating officer there are sufficient grounds to raise reasonable suspicion against him depending on the material collected during the investigation,” the HC said.
