Prerna Gala
Published on: 28 September 2022 at 16:39 IST
The mother of the late Bollywood actress Jiah Khan has asked the Bombay High Court to order the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in the US to look into her daughter’s death. [Union of India versus Rabia Khan].
Rabia was severely criticised by a division bench of Justices Ajay Gadkari and Milind Jadhav for filing such a motion simply to delay the trial in the case.
“It is a clear indication of procrastinating the trial, especially when her substantive rights have not been foreclosed,” the Court said.
The bench noted that the attorney for Rabia pleaded ignorance and was unable to respond despite its repeated questions regarding the statute that allows an Indian court to give instructions to a foreign agency like the FBI.
“The entire approach of the petitioner appears to procure an order from this Court, without facing trial, that the death of the victim was homicidal and not suicidal. This kind of approach appears to circumvent the due process of law.”
“Thus, we strongly deprecate the repeated filing of proceedings by the petitioner for the same cause of action,” the Court said.
The bench also stated that it was inclined to charge Rabia with high-profile fines.
On the advice of her attorneys, she chose not to, though.
The bench rejected the “legal review report” SCARMANS, a UK-based law company, prepared on May 1, 2019, alleging significant flaws in the Central Bureau of Investigation’s investigation of the case (CBI).
The study questioned the objectivity and rigour of the CBI’s investigation of the case and also exposed certain fundamental mistakes and omissions made by the investigators, leaving open the possibility that the actress’ death was not a suicide.
After reading the report, the bench expressed dismay at the way it was written. The bench observed that –
“We are aghast and shocked to read the said report and, most importantly, what is stated therein. We are afraid to state that this report attempts to deliver a verdict even before the trial is over in the present case.”
“It is appalling to read in the report that suggestions are given for review of police procedure and training for investigators; also, a recommendation for the appointment of SIT when this Court has passed a detailed order after considering all issues raised by the petitioner and the same has been confirmed by the Supreme Court, which is the highest Court of this land,”
On June 3, 2013, Jiah Khan’s apartment in Juhu was discovered to be hanged. After a week, on June 10, her mother Rabia gave the police a note claiming to have discovered a suicide note in her daughter’s bedroom. In the note, her death was attributed to actor Sooraj Pancholi. Since then, the actor has been accused of encouraging Khan, who was his lover, to commit suicide.
Rabia, however, alleged that her daughter had been killed and petitioned the Bombay High Court to move the investigation to the CBI because she was dissatisfied with the Mumbai Police’s conclusion that her daughter had committed suicide.
On July 3, 2014, the Justice Naresh Patil-led court handed the investigation over to the CBI, which also concluded that the death was not homicidal but rather suicidal.
One of Rabia’s main requests was that the investigation be turned over to the FBI, although the bench had already rejected this at the time.
The petitioner left for the UK shortly before she was going to be cross-examined after the trial in the case started and after she had been examined.
According to the bench, the current petition is just an ongoing demand to “procure” a ruling from the court that her daughter was murdered.
“At places in the report, there are adverse comments on the judgement and orders delivered by this Court which are not appreciated and deprecated by us. We cannot take countenance of such a report, especially in the light of various decisions rendered by this Court (in the present matter itself), the trial court and the Supreme Court,” the bench said.
The judges “highly criticised” Rabia’s behaviour for getting such a biassed report from a company without any legal standing in India.
The bench underscored that, “Rule of law is prevalent in our country and we do not have the slightest doubt that the trial court shall deliver its verdict without fear or favour whilst adhering to the due process of law,”
Rabia’s actions in obtaining such a biased report from an organisation with no legal standing in India were “seriously chastised” by the judges.
The bench opined that,“We would like to state that after the petitioner has repeatedly failed to procure orders as per her desire before the completion of trial, she has now found this ingenious way of procuring a report from a firm situated beyond the territorial jurisdiction of our country, who has failed to understand even the basic difference between investigation and trial and has once again repeated and reiterated her earlier request for further investigation,”
The judges stated that it appears from the outset that the CBI conducted a complete inquiry that was fully impartial, fair, and transparent.