Sushant Singh Rajput’s family has rejected the CBI closure report, calling it an “eyewash.” The CBI found no evidence of wrongdoing by Rhea Chakraborty. The family’s lawyer criticized the report’s lack of supporting documents and plans to file a protest. The Patna court will hear the case on December 20.
The Central Bureau of Investigation concluded that there was no proof indicating Sushant was unlawfully held, threatened or pushed to commit suicide by his girlfriend, Rhea Chakraborty. They also found no evidence that she misused his money or belongings. Singh died by an apparent suicide, which triggered a prolonged and intense investigation. According to a news report, the closure document revealed that Rajput had called Rhea ‘family’.Legal team opposes findingsNow, his family is opposing the closure report, labeling it as superficial and incomplete. Singh’s relatives and their legal representatives have raised objections to the document’s conclusions. According to Hindustan Times, lawyer Varun Singh commented that this is nothing but an eyewash. If CBI really wanted to come out with the truth, it would have submitted all the supporting case documents including chats, technical records, statements of witnesses, medical records, etc in the court along with the final (closure) report, which they have not done. They will file a protest petition against this closure report, which is based on a shoddy investigation.Details from closure report on timelineThe closure report quoted an officer saying that an investigation revealed that Sushant had committed suicide. None of the accused persons had lived/stayed with him between June 8, 2020 and June 14, 2020 (the day he was found hanging in his Bandra flat). Rhea and her brother Showik left the house on June 8, and thereafter didn’t visit the house. Sushant had spoken to Showik on June 10 through WhatsApp at 1441 hours but had no conversations with Rhea between June 8 and June 14. Evidence had not come on record to show the meeting of Sushant with Rhea or any of her family members of being in touch by any other means. Shruti Modi had stopped visiting Sushant’s house since she fractured her leg in February. Furthermore, Meetu Singh (sister of Sushant) had stayed with him in his flat from June 8 to June 12.Officer’s conclusion on provocationThe officer further explained in the report that, therefore, no evidence of any immediate provocation/abetment by any of the accused persons has come on record, which may have led Sushant to commit suicide. The agency further maintained that no evidence has come on record suggesting that Sushant was illegally confined or restrained in any manner by any of the accused or any other person.Claims about Rhea and propertySushant’s father accused Rhea and her family of pressuring the actor to take his own life and misappropriating his assets. However, the CBI’s closure report stated that when Rhea, along with her brother, left Sushant’s house on June 8, she took away her Apple laptop and Apple wristwatch, which were gifted to her by Sushant. No evidence has emerged during the investigation about any property dishonestly taken out of the possession of Sushant without his knowledge by Rhea or any other accused person. The agency also noted that the only allegation that has been levelled by the family of Sushant is that he told them that Rhea threatened to make his medical records public, in case he didn’t toe her line. However, this evidence is in the realm of hearsay.Family’s lawyer critiques reportAdvocate Varun Singh, representing Sushant’s family, remarked, “Simply saying Sushant Singh’s account has not been used to take out funds is not enough. CBI should have provided the bank statement to back its claim. It’s a flimsy report, which won’t stand in the court of law.” The report also noted that the Patna court will take up the closure report case on December 20.Disclaimer: The information in this report is based on a legal hearing as reported by a third-party source. The details provided represent allegations made by the parties involved and are not proven facts. The case is ongoing, and a final verdict has not been reached. The publication does not claim that the allegations are true.
