Disha Salian’s Father Being Used as a ‘Tool’ by Political Rivals, Aaditya Thackeray’s Lawyer Tells Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court heard arguments in Satish Salian’s plea seeking an FIR and investigation into the death of his daughter, Disha Salian, as Aaditya Thackeray’s counsel alleged that the petition was politically motivated. The court also raised questions about the prolonged inquiry conducted without a formal criminal investigation.

The Bombay High Court has heard arguments in a petition seeking registration of an FIR and a fresh investigation into the death of celebrity manager Disha Salian.

During the hearing, senior counsel Sudeep Pasbola, appearing for Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Aaditya Thackeray, argued that the petition filed by Disha’s father, Satish Salian, was politically motivated and intended to target the politician.

Pasbola submitted that Satish Salian had become a “tool” in the hands of political rivals who, he argued, were relying on media reports and hearsay to make allegations against Thackeray.

The Bench of Justices Sarang V Kotwal and Ranjitsinha R Bhonsale also examined the legal process followed after Disha Salian’s death and raised questions about the prolonged inquiry under the provisions dealing with unnatural deaths.

After hearing submissions from the parties, the High Court reserved its judgment. The matter remains pending, and the court is expected to pronounce its decision in due course.

Aaditya Thackeray’s Counsel Alleges Political Motivation

Senior counsel Sudeep Pasbola argued before the High Court that the petition should be viewed in the context of what he described as a politically motivated effort against Aaditya Thackeray.

According to the submissions made on Thackeray’s behalf, Satish Salian was being used by political opponents to target the Shiv Sena (UBT) leader.

Pasbola told the court that the petition was allegedly a mala fide exercise pursued for an ulterior motive.

The argument formed a central part of Thackeray’s response to the allegations raised in the petition.

It is important to note that these are submissions made by Thackeray’s legal counsel before the court and do not represent judicial findings.

The High Court has not concluded that the allegations against any individual have been established.

What Satish Salian Is Seeking

Satish Salian approached the Bombay High Court seeking the registration of an FIR and an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the death of his daughter.

In his petition, Salian has made serious allegations and sought legal action against Aaditya Thackeray and others.

These allegations are contested and remain unproven. Aaditya Thackeray has previously denied the accusations and challenged the proceedings against him.

Disha Salian died on June 8, 2020, after falling from a high-rise building in Mumbai’s Malad area.

Following her death, police registered an Accidental Death Report and initiated proceedings relating to an unnatural death.

The circumstances surrounding the case have remained the subject of public discussion and legal proceedings for several years.

Bombay High Court Questions Prolonged Section 174 Inquiry

During the hearing, the High Court also focused on the legal procedure adopted in the case.

The judges raised concerns about the extended inquiry conducted under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

Section 174 traditionally deals with the police procedure and inquiry undertaken in cases involving unnatural or suspicious deaths.

The court observed that such an inquiry has a limited purpose and is distinct from a criminal investigation initiated following the registration of an FIR in a cognisable offence.

The Bench questioned whether an inquiry of this nature could continue for years when doubts or allegations persisted.

The court emphasised that an inquiry into an unnatural death does not automatically amount to a criminal investigation and cannot, by itself, substitute the procedure applicable where a cognisable offence is disclosed.

According to the observations reported from the hearing, the Bench indicated that the issue before it was whether the circumstances and material presented were sufficient to justify further legal action.

Court Says It Is Not Concluding That a Crime Took Place

The High Court also made it clear that its observations should not be interpreted as a finding that the allegations made in the petition had been proved.

The Bench clarified that it was not conclusively determining that rape or murder had occurred.

Instead, the court said it was examining the legal question of whether the allegations and available circumstances created sufficient grounds to require registration of an FIR and a proper investigation.

The distinction is significant.

At the stage of considering a petition seeking registration of an FIR, a court may examine the material placed before it without making a final determination regarding the guilt or innocence of any individual.

A final conclusion about the facts of a criminal case can only follow the appropriate legal process, including investigation and, where applicable, judicial proceedings.

The High Court’s eventual order will determine the legal course of action in the present petition.

The Earlier Investigation Into Disha Salian’s Death

After Disha Salian’s death in June 2020, authorities initially treated the matter as an accidental or unnatural death and registered an ADR.

An inquiry was subsequently conducted under the relevant provisions of criminal procedure.

According to the case history presented during the proceedings, Satish Salian had initially told investigators in 2020 that he did not suspect foul play and was satisfied with the investigation at that time.

The Maharashtra government later constituted a Special Investigation Team to examine the matter further.

In submissions made before the High Court in July 2025, the SIT reportedly stated that its investigation had not found evidence of foul play at that stage, while the inquiry process was continuing.

Investigators had also referred to material including post-mortem and forensic findings, CCTV footage, mobile phone records and witness statements.

According to the investigation’s submissions, this material did not indicate suspicious activity.

However, Satish Salian later changed his position and approached the High Court with allegations regarding his daughter’s death, seeking registration of an FIR.

Those allegations are now part of the legal proceedings before the court and remain contested.

Maharashtra Government Defends the Investigation

The Maharashtra government also defended the investigation during the High Court hearing.

Public Prosecutor Shishir Hiray submitted that the available material did not indicate foul play.

The prosecution referred to investigative material including spot panchanamas and witness statements.

The statement of Disha Salian’s fiancé, Rohan Roy, was also among the material referred to during the proceedings.

According to the state’s submissions, the evidence examined during the investigation did not support allegations of foul play.

The prosecutor also argued that public and social media pressure had contributed to further inquiries being conducted in the matter.

The state’s position, however, remains subject to the High Court’s consideration of the petition and the legal questions raised before it.

Aaditya Thackeray Has Denied the Allegations

Aaditya Thackeray has consistently rejected the allegations made against him in connection with the case.

Earlier, when Satish Salian approached the High Court seeking registration of an FIR, Thackeray described the allegations and proceedings as an attempt to damage his reputation.

He has maintained that he would contest the allegations through the legal process.

Thackeray’s counsel reiterated the political motivation argument during the latest hearing, telling the court that the petition was being used as part of an effort to target the Shiv Sena (UBT) leader.

No finding of criminal wrongdoing has been made against Thackeray in relation to the allegations discussed in the petition.

Why the High Court Hearing Matters

The case raises an important procedural question about the difference between an inquiry into an unnatural death and a full-fledged criminal investigation.

The High Court is considering whether the circumstances placed before it require an FIR to be registered and whether further investigation is legally necessary.

The court’s observations during oral arguments should not be treated as the final outcome of the case.

Similarly, arguments presented by lawyers representing either side remain submissions unless and until the court accepts or rejects them in its final order.

The High Court’s reserved judgment will therefore be significant in determining the next legal stage of the matter.

Judgment Reserved

After hearing detailed submissions from the parties, the Bombay High Court reserved its judgment on Satish Salian’s petition.

The court has yet to announce the date on which the order will be pronounced.

Until the judgment is delivered, the case remains pending before the High Court.

The allegations made by Satish Salian remain disputed, while Aaditya Thackeray continues to deny wrongdoing and challenge the proceedings.

The Maharashtra government’s investigation has also been defended before the court.

The final order of the Bombay High Court is expected to provide greater clarity on whether the court will direct registration of an FIR, order further investigation or take another course permitted under law.

For now, the most significant development is that the High Court has completed hearing arguments from the concerned parties and reserved its judgment.