Sushant Singh Rajput demise: CBI refutes closure of case, says investigation continues

New Delhi: The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on Thursday termed “speculative” and “faulty” the media stories claiming that the company has concluded its probe in actor Sushant Singh Rajput demise case and should quickly file a closure report, officers stated.

In third such assertion since registering an FIR within the case, the central investigating company termed as speculative tales associated to its discovering within the matter.

“The CBI continues to research the demise of Sushant Singh Rajput. There are particular speculative stories in media that the CBI has reached a conclusion. It could be reiterated that these stories are speculative and faulty,” CBI spokesperson RK Gaur stated in a press release.

The CBI is probing a case of abetment to suicide in opposition to Rajput’s girlfriend Rhea Chakraborty and her members of the family.

The company had taken over the FIR filed on the grievance of KK Singh, Rajput’s father, at a Patna police station alleging felony conspiracy, abetment to suicide, wrongful confinement, felony breach of belief, theft and felony intimidation, which was forwarded to the Centre for a CBI probe.

Rajput, aged 34, was discovered hanging from the ceiling of his condominium in suburban Bandra in Mumbai on June 14 and since then, the Mumbai Police has been probing the case bearing in mind numerous angles.

AIIMS forensic medication specialists had dominated out any foul play within the actor’s demise.

In its conclusive medico-legal opinion to the CBI, the six-member workforce of forensic medical doctors had dismissed the claims of “poisoning and strangling” made within the case.

“It’s a case of hanging and demise by suicide. Now we have submitted our conclusive report back to the Central Bureau of Investigation,” Sudhir Gupta, chairman of the forensic medical board, stated.

There was no harm on the physique aside from that of hanging. Additionally, there was no mark of battle and scuffle, he stated, however refused to expose any additional particulars stating the case was sub judice.

Please follow and like us:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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