The long-running controversies surrounding the deaths of Sushant Singh Rajput and Disha Salian have entered another significant phase, with renewed judicial scrutiny, fresh investigative questions and continued demands for transparency.
In a detailed discussion on Qvive Network, Chief Editor Ashutosh Pathak spoke with Advocate Nilesh Ojha, who has been closely associated with the legal proceedings concerning the Disha Salian case and the family’s efforts to seek a comprehensive investigation.
The conversation examined questions surrounding the original investigations, forensic documentation, alleged inconsistencies in the handling of evidence, the role of investigative agencies, and the legal developments that have now brought the matter back into the spotlight.
Qvive has described its coverage as part of its continuing reporting on the Sushant Singh Rajput and Disha Salian cases.[qvive links provide below]
It is important to state at the outset that allegations discussed in the programme—including allegations of murder, sexual assault, conspiracy, corruption or investigative interference—remain matters for investigation and judicial determination unless established by competent authorities or a court.
Questions Over Sanjay Kumar Singh’s Role
According to allegations presented by advocate Nilesh Ojha, Sanjay Kumar Singh assumed control of important NCB cases connected with the Sushant Singh Rajput investigation after the initial investigation had begun.
Specific reference was made to Crime Nos. 15 and 16 of 2020 registered by the NCB. It was alleged that these cases contained important digital evidence and references to several prominent individuals.
Questions were subsequently raised over why the investigations allegedly did not result in further arrests or significant action against individuals whose names were reportedly present in the material.
It was further alleged that Sanjay Kumar later moved from Delhi to Mumbai after taking charge of the cases.
These claims remain allegations and require verification through official records, inquiry reports and judicial proceedings.
Sameer Wankhede and the NCB Investigation
Sameer Wankhede’s role has also emerged as a significant part of the controversy.
Sameer was involved in the NCB’s investigation into drug-related allegations connected with the Sushant Singh Rajput case and arrested Rhea Chakraborty in 2020.
According to the claims presented by Nilesh Ojha, Sameer pursued the investigation aggressively and subsequently became the subject of allegations and proceedings that, it was alleged, could have weakened the original investigation.
Reference was made to a Bombay High Court proceeding concerning Wankhede, with the claim that the court granted a stay on the proceedings being challenged.
The development has prompted questions about whether investigative officers can carry out sensitive investigations independently when influential individuals may potentially be affected.
Allegations of Financial Irregularities
Serious allegations concerning financial transactions involving Sanjay Kumar Singh were also raised.
The allegations referred to a preliminary inquiry examining payments allegedly made toward the medical education of Singh’s son. Amounts running into crores of rupees were cited in connection with alleged educational expenses and other transactions.
An alleged property transaction involving a four-bedroom apartment in the Panvel area was also mentioned.
Questions were raised over whether these assets and financial transactions were properly disclosed in accordance with the rules applicable to public servants.
The allegations further claimed that Sanjay Kumar had received financial assistance or loans from private individuals. The circumstances surrounding those transactions were questioned, particularly in relation to disclosure requirements and possible conflicts of interest.
Any such allegations would need to be established through the relevant inquiry reports and competent authorities.
The Aryan Khan and Cordelia Cruise Case
The role of Sanjay Kumar Singh in the Cordelia cruise investigation involving Aryan Khan was also revisited.
Questions were raised over the circumstances surrounding Aryan Khan’s eventual clean chit and Sanjay Kumar’s role in the investigation.
The allegations against Sameer Wankhede concerning an alleged monetary transaction were also examined. Nilesh Ojha questioned whether, if such a payment had actually been made, the person allegedly making the payment should also have faced legal scrutiny.
The issue was presented as a question of equal application of the law and the need for authorities to establish the factual basis of allegations before initiating prosecution.
Fresh Questions Over the Disha Salian Case
The investigation into Disha Salian’s death was another major focus.
Questions were raised concerning the timing of her post-mortem examination, the alleged absence of video recording and the handling of photographic evidence.
The role of several police officials was also questioned, including former Mumbai Police commissioner Param Bir Singh and other officers associated with the investigation.
Particular attention was given to why certain investigative leads and individuals allegedly connected with the case were not subjected to further questioning or investigation.
The claims also alleged that a closure report was filed after photographic evidence relating to the case attracted significant public attention.
Whether these allegations accurately reflect the underlying investigative record remains a matter for the competent authorities and courts to determine.
Allegations Concerning Witness Protection
Another serious issue involved the treatment and protection of potential witnesses.
It was alleged that Disha Salian’s parents and actor Rohan Rai were provided police protection for an extended period.
Questions were raised about the circumstances surrounding those arrangements and whether security measures may have restricted access to individuals who could potentially provide information about the case.
The need for effective protection of witnesses was highlighted as an essential component of any investigation involving powerful or influential individuals.
Calls for Examination of Sachin Waze’s Claims
Former police officer Sachin Waze was also mentioned in connection with information allegedly relevant to the Sushant Singh Rajput case.
A call was made for any genuine evidence or information in Waze’s possession to be submitted before the CBI and other appropriate authorities.
The emphasis was placed on examining documentary and material evidence rather than relying solely on speculation or public allegations.
If credible evidence exists, it would be for the investigating authorities to independently verify it and determine whether further action is warranted.
A Wider Question of Accountability
The allegations have raised a larger question about accountability within India’s law-enforcement institutions.
High-profile investigations involving celebrities, politicians, business figures and senior officials inevitably attract intense public scrutiny. In such cases, the credibility of the investigation depends heavily on transparent procedures, preservation of evidence and impartial treatment of every individual involved.
Allegations of corruption, suppression of evidence, investigative interference or conspiracy are serious and cannot be established merely through public claims. They require documentary evidence, independent inquiry and, ultimately, judicial determination.
The Road Ahead
The renewed questions surrounding the Sushant Singh Rajput and Disha Salian cases underline the continuing demand for transparency.
Issues involving digital evidence, witness statements, post-mortem procedures, financial transactions and the conduct of investigating officers remain central to calls for further scrutiny.
For the families and those seeking answers, the essential demand is that every credible piece of evidence should be examined without fear or favour.
The ultimate responsibility lies with the appropriate investigative and judicial authorities to establish what happened, determine whether any wrongdoing occurred and hold accountable anyone found responsible.