Mumbai: A special court on Thursday rejected a plea by the CBI, seeking to further probe the suicide case of actor Jiah Khan.

In a plea to the court conducting the trial under charges of abetment of suicide against actor Sooraj Pancholi, CBI had said it wanted to send a dupatta used in the suicide for analysis to the forensic laboratory in Chandigarh. On June 3, 2013, Jiah was found hanging at her Juhu flat, after which Pancholi was arrested and charged with abetment. He was later released on bail.

The CBI’s plea also sought permission to send phones of Jiah and Sooraj to forensic unit, FBI, US, to recover the messages. The court also rejected a plea by Khan’s mother, Rabiya, who had pointed out to “defects” in the earlier investigation.

In 2019, the CBI had first moved the plea. Sooraj’s lawyer, Prashant Patil, had then sought its dismissal. The defence reply said that CBI’s plea was in direct contempt of a 2017 Bombay High Court (HC) order. It said Jiah’s mother had moved a plea in HC, making a similar plea, which was rejected in 2017. The reply stated that in an affidavit filed by CBI in response to Rabiya’s plea, the investigating officer had submitted that messages by the accused and Jiah were related to his meeting with a jewellery designer at a hotel and not connected to the incident. It said the plea was contradictory to CBI’s earlier stand.

---------------------------

Mumbai: In a detailed order refusing to grant CBI and Jiah Khan’s mother’s pleas for a further probe into her alleged suicide, a special court said relief claimed was nothing but a replica of earlier pleas on issues already decided by Bombay High Court, indicating that applications before it were a clear abuse of the process of law.

“Instead of the clear position... these applications filed, which indicate that the complainant (Jiah’s mother Rabiya) does not want to proceed further with trial, conduct appears deliberate and intentional to delay and procrastinate the trial. The alleged FIR registered in 2013 and since around eight years it awaits effective trial. Applications present before this court are not maintainable, but it is clearly an abuse of process of law,” special judge A S Sayyad said.

In a 2019 plea to the court conducting the trial under charges of abetment of suicide against actor Sooraj Pancholi, CBI said it wanted to send a ‘dupatta’ used in the suicide for analysis to the forensic laboratory in Chandigarh. On June 3, 2013, Jiah was found hanging at her Juhu flat, after which Pancholi was arrested and charged with abetment. He was later released on bail.

CBI’s plea sought permission to send phones of Jiah and Pancholi to the forensic unit, FBI, US, to recover messages. Rabiya, who pointed out “defects” in the earlier probe, sought further investigation into cause of death by formulating a Special Investigation Team (SIT) presided over by CBI’s director or joint director.

In July 2014, following an HC order, investigations were transferred from Mumbai Police to CBI. Rabiya had moved the HC after being unsatisfied by police investigations and claiming that the death was a murder. The HC ordered CBI to conduct further investigations. CBI concluded it was a suicide, and in December 2015, a chargesheet was submitted against Pancholi for abetting Jiah’s suicide.

Pancholi’s lawyer Prashant Patil opposed the pleas and submitted relief sought by CBI and Rabiya was decided “six times” by courts. The defence replied that CBI’s plea was in direct contempt of a 2017 HC order. It said Jiah’s mother had moved a plea in HC, making a similar plea, rejected in 2017. The reply said that in an affidavit filed by CBI in response to Rabiya’s plea, the investigating officer submitted that messages by the accused and Jiah were related to his meeting with a jewellery designer at a hotel, and not connected to the incident. It said the plea was contradictory to CBI’s earlier stand.