Bombay HC Transfers Advocate Sarita Khanchandani Suicide Case Probe To Kalyan Crime Branch Over Bias Concerns
Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has transferred the investigation into the suicide case of advocate Sarita Khanchandani to the Kalyan Crime Branch, directing the Vithalwadi police to immediately hand over the case papers. The order came after the deceased’s husband, advocate Purushottam Khanchandani, filed a writ petition seeking the transfer of the investigation to another agency, expressing serious apprehensions of bias and conflict of interest on the part of the local police investigating the matter.
Husband Confirms Court Order
Advocate Purushottam, while speaking to the Free Press Journal (FPJ), said, “The court on Thursday has passed the orders, where it has directed the local police to hand over the case papers to the Kalyan Crime Branch. However, we are yet to receive the certified order copy.”
The development was confirmed by Senior Inspector Ajit Shinde of Crime Branch Unit-3, who accepted that it's an effective order as the Vithalwadi police had already handed over the investigation papers to the Crime Branch office.
Petition Filed Seeking Independent Probe
Purushottam Khanchandani had approached the Bombay High Court on January 8, seeking the transfer of the investigation into Sarita’s death from the current police zone, citing serious apprehensions of bias and conflict of interest.
In his petition, Purushottam contended that the investigation by the local police, particularly the Vithalwadi Police Station, suffered from a grave conflict of interest. He pointed out that Sarita, an advocate, public interest litigant, environmentalist and whistle-blower, had filed several complaints and petitions against officers of the same police station and officials of the Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation. Allowing the same officers to investigate her death, he argued, defeats the principle of impartiality and renders the investigation untrustworthy.
Petition Invokes Right To Fair Investigation
Invoking Article 21 of the Constitution, the petition stated that the right to life also includes the right to a fair and impartial investigation, particularly in cases of unnatural death. The petitioner alleged that the probe so far had been marked by bias, delay and opacity, thereby violating this fundamental guarantee.
Carpenters To Get ₹2 Lakh Accident Insurance, Scholarships And Welfare Benefits Under New Action TESA ProgrammeAmong the key grounds raised was the delay in registering the FIR. While an Accidental Death Report (ADR) was recorded on August 28, 2025, the FIR was registered only on September 4, 2025, allegedly after repeated representations by the petitioner. The delay, the plea stated, raised suspicion of manipulation and deliberate inaction to shield the accused.
The petition further alleged that crucial evidence, such as CCTV footage and the suicide note, was not promptly secured or preserved and came to light belatedly. Purushottam also claimed that despite repeated threats faced by the deceased during her lifetime, the police had failed to provide her with adequate protection.
The plea asserted that Sarita was targeted by an alleged nexus of politicians, alleged land grabbers and civic officials whom she had challenged through her activism and litigation, and that the local police were institutionally connected to these very elements.
To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: