SC Upholds Bombay High Court Decision, Rejects CBI Plea Against Quashing Lookout Circulars for Rhea Chakraborty

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court dismissed the Central Bureau of Investigation’s (CBI) plea against the Bombay High Court’s decision to quash lookout circulars (LOCs) issued against Bollywood actor Rhea Chakraborty and her family. The decision brings some relief to Chakraborty, who has faced intense public and legal scrutiny since the tragic death of actor Sushant Singh Rajput in 2020. The Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and K.V. Viswanathan, deemed the petition “frivolous” and noted that it appeared to be filed solely due to the high-profile nature of the individuals involved.

The LOCs were initially issued in 2020, following allegations made by Rajput’s family against Chakraborty, her brother Showik, and their parents. Rajput’s father had accused them of abetting his son's suicide, sparking a chain of investigations that ensnared the Chakraborty family in various legal cases, from narcotics to money laundering probes.

Key Points from the Supreme Court Hearing

The bench did not hold back in its criticism of the CBI's petition, with Justice Gavai admonishing the agency’s pursuit of what he described as “frivolous” matters. He questioned the necessity of issuing LOCs in this case, especially when the Chakrabortys had shown no signs of non-cooperation with authorities. Justice Gavai remarked, “You issue LOCs for all this!” and warned the CBI against pursuing similar actions merely due to the profile of the individuals involved. The Supreme Court underscored that having roots in society and demonstrating cooperation with law enforcement negated the grounds for the LOCs.

Background of the Sushant Singh Rajput Case

Sushant Singh Rajput was found dead in his Mumbai residence on June 14, 2020. Although initially considered a case of suicide by the Mumbai Police, the death quickly morphed into a high-profile investigation involving multiple central agencies. Amid mounting media pressure and public interest, Rajput’s father filed a complaint in Bihar, alleging that Rhea Chakraborty and her family had financially exploited his son and driven him to suicide. This led to the transfer of the case to the CBI, while parallel investigations were initiated by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for suspected money laundering and by the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) for alleged drug-related offenses.

Bombay High Court's Grounds for Quashing the LOCs

In February 2022, the Bombay High Court quashed the LOCs issued against Chakraborty and her family, asserting that the grounds for their issuance were unjustified. The court pointed out that the LOCs had been active for over three years without a substantial basis, which infringed on the Chakraborty family’s fundamental right to travel. The High Court found that merely citing accusations without evidence or sufficient justification fell short of the procedural requirements for LOCs. Moreover, it underscored that the family had cooperated consistently with the investigating agencies, making the imposition of LOCs unnecessary.

The Supreme Court's Reinforcement of the High Court’s Stance

With the Supreme Court upholding the High Court's decision, the ruling brings a semblance of closure for Chakraborty, who had been embroiled in legal battles that affected both her career and personal life. The Supreme Court's strong language and dismissal of the CBI’s petition signal a critical stance on the potential misuse of LOCs in cases involving high-profile individuals. The bench emphasized that procedural law must apply equally to all, regardless of their social or professional standing.

Justice Gavai’s statement, “Both persons have deep roots in society,” highlighted the Court’s belief that the Chakrabortys were neither flight risks nor a threat to obstruct justice, a standard typically associated with LOC issuance. The Court’s order represents a call for judicious use of investigative procedures, particularly in cases where the accused have consistently complied with investigative requests.

Public and Media Reaction to the Case

The death of Sushant Singh Rajput and subsequent legal battles involving Rhea Chakraborty ignited a media frenzy. Chakraborty was targeted across news outlets and social media, facing vilification, allegations, and death threats from several quarters. Various commentators noted that the media trial mirrored a larger societal issue, where public opinion seemed to supplant due process.

While some in the public and media continue to view Chakraborty with suspicion, the Supreme Court’s ruling adds a counterweight, reaffirming that the judiciary operates on the principles of evidence and rights rather than public opinion. Chakraborty’s supporters and legal experts see the decision as a critical reminder that judicial processes must be free from external pressures and focused on fairness.

Broader Implications for High-Profile Investigations

The case has sparked a broader conversation on the rights of accused individuals in high-profile investigations. Legal experts suggest that while LOCs are vital for ensuring that persons of interest do not flee the country, they should not be used indiscriminately or without substantive justification. The Supreme Court’s stance reiterates the importance of a rights-based approach to law enforcement, highlighting that fundamental rights such as freedom of movement cannot be curtailed without due process.

The judgment also sheds light on the need for a balanced approach in high-profile cases, urging authorities to avoid disproportionate measures and respect established legal guidelines. Justice Viswanathan’s comments emphasized the need for a fair application of legal provisions, regardless of the social or professional standing of those involved.

A Step Toward Closure for Chakraborty

This Supreme Court ruling marks a pivotal moment for Rhea Chakraborty and her family, who have endured a lengthy ordeal since 2020. It offers not only legal relief but also underscores the importance of adherence to procedural justice. For Chakraborty, this decision is a significant step towards reclaiming personal freedom, and it reaffirms the judiciary’s commitment to upholding rights even in cases under intense public scrutiny. While the case surrounding Sushant Singh Rajput’s death continues to echo in the public domain, the Supreme Court's message is clear: adherence to due process is paramount.