Rhea Chakraborty’s Lawyer on Supreme Court Hearing: We Are Satisfied With The Outcome

Actor Rhea Chakraborty’s lawyer, Satish Maneshinde said that they are ‘satisfied with the outcome of the hearing’ at the Supreme Court in Sushant Singh Rajput‘s death case. In a statement, Maneshide said, “The Petition in the SC will be heard in the next week. All concerned have to file their replies in the meantime. State of Maharashtra is directed to place all the investigation steps taken in the case before the SC. We are satisfied with the outcome of the hearing. In view of the pendency of the proceedings in SC Rhea or anyone on her behalf refrain from making any comments in the case.”

Earlier during the Supreme Court Hearing, the top court asked the Maharashtra and Bihar governments and Sushant’s father KK Singh to file replied on Rhea’s plea seeking transfer of the FIR filed in Patna to Mumbai. The apex court has also directed the Mumbai Police to file a status report on probe conducted so far in the death case. The further hearing will be held next week.

Meanwhile, Centre informed Supreme Court it has accepted the Bihar government’s recommendation for CBI inquiry into the death of the actor.

The top court, in its order, gave three days to all parties to put on record their respective stand. It also noted that the Mumbai Police must submit its records of investigations done so far. Justice Hrishikesh Roy, hearing the arguments on a plea by Sushant’s girlfriend Rhea Chakraborty seeking transfer of the case from Patna to Mumbai, said a “very unfortunate incident has taken place”.

Senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for Sushant’s father, opposed the plea. Singh argued that evidence was being tampered with. “It is in everyone’s interest that the truth should be unraveled,” observed Justice Roy, who also pulled up the Maharashtra government for quarantining for 14 days a Bihar Police officer, who was specially deputed to Mumbai to lead a team of four into the probe. The Maharashtra government counsel insisted that there has been no destruction of evidence in the case.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *