Table of Contents
CBI Closes Sushant Singh Rajput Case – Highlighting a Media Trial Gone Too Far
About – Subhash Chandra’s Apology Four years after actor Sushant Singh Rajput’s tragic death, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has officially concluded its probe, ruling out foul play and confirming it as a case of suicide. In the wake of this closure, veteran media entrepreneur and Zee founder Subhash Chandra has issued a rare public apology to actress Rhea Chakraborty, acknowledging the undue media scrutiny she faced—led in part by his own news network, Zee News.
Chandra’s statement, shared on X (formerly Twitter), signals an important moment of introspection within Indian journalism, particularly concerning the ethical lapses in sensationalized media trials. His words—”In retrospect, I feel that Rhea Chakraborty was made out to be an accused by the media, led by Zee News through its editor and reporters at that time”—reflect a candid admission of the role mainstream media played in vilifying Chakraborty without substantive evidence.
The Rise and Fall of a Media Witch Hunt
The tragic demise of Sushant Singh Rajput on June 14, 2020, set off an unparalleled media storm in India. What began as an investigation into a young actor’s mental health struggles quickly spiraled into a high-decibel, conspiracy-laden spectacle, with news anchors, social media influencers, and political figures weighing in with unverified theories.
Among those targeted most aggressively was Rhea Chakraborty, Rajput’s girlfriend at the time of his passing. Following an FIR filed by Rajput’s father in Patna, alleging abetment to suicide and financial fraud, Chakraborty became the focal point of a narrative steeped in speculation. Newsrooms dissected her text messages, debated her body language, and aired primetime specials that labeled her a “gold digger” and a “witch,” often with little regard for due process or verified facts.
Amid this, television news networks, particularly Zee News, Republic TV, and Times Now, fueled conspiracy theories, airing aggressive primetime debates that vilified Chakraborty and called for her arrest.
Former Zee News editor Sudhir Chaudhary played a key role in this narrative, hosting multiple segments that questioned Chakraborty’s character, her financial dealings, and even her personal habits. Clips of his shows from that period show inflammatory headlines like “Rhea ke jhooth ka naya video” (Rhea’s new lies exposed) and “Drug conspiracy: Rhea ka sach” (The truth about Rhea’s drug links).
In September 2020, Chakraborty was arrested by the NCB on charges of procuring marijuana for Rajput. Though granted bail after nearly a month, her image had already been irrevocably tarnished in the public eye.
The media’s role in amplifying baseless accusations became a subject of widespread criticism. Many journalists and commentators raised concerns about media ethics, trial by television, and the long-term impact of such relentless scrutiny on individuals.
CBI Closure Report
After nearly five years of investigations, the CBI, in its final closure report filed before the Bandra magistrate court on March 22, 2025, categorically ruled out murder, reaffirming that Rajput’s death was “a simple case of suicide.” The agency found no evidence to implicate Chakraborty, her family, or any other individuals named in the multiple FIRs filed since 2020.
The report not only vindicated Chakraborty but also raised serious questions about the accountability of news networks that aggressively pursued an unsubstantiated narrative. The Supreme Court, too, had earlier dismissed a CBI plea to reinstate a lookout notice against Chakraborty, calling it “frivolous” and “unnecessary.”
While the CBI’s decision offers legal closure, the psychological and professional damage endured by Chakraborty remains immeasurable. In past interviews, she has spoken about the trauma of being vilified, the online abuse directed at her, and the loss of work opportunities due to the controversy.
Subhash Chandra Apology
Chandra’s recent apology, while significant, comes after years of reputational damage inflicted upon Chakraborty. His statement also stops short of holding specific individuals accountable, particularly the editors and anchors responsible for driving the narrative.
Furthermore, his assertion that he had “no involvement” raises questions about editorial responsibility. As the founder and mentor of Zee News, his influence over the network’s direction during such a high-profile case cannot be understated.
Media experts argue that while his admission is welcome, it should be accompanied by institutional changes to prevent similar incidents in the future. “An apology without accountability is meaningless. What steps will Zee News take to ensure responsible journalism? Will there be a review of their past reporting? These are the questions that need answers,” said media ethicist Dr. Anjali Mehta.
Chakraborty herself has not yet responded to Chandra’s apology. However, her past statements indicate lingering resentment over the way she was treated. In a 2024 interview, she remarked, “I have forgiven, but I will never forget what was done to me and my family.”
The Sushant Singh Rajput case will go down in history as one of the most sensationalized criminal investigations in Indian media. It exposed the dangerous intersection of journalism, politics, and public sentiment, where news coverage morphed into a public trial, often disregarding facts in favor of TRP-driven narratives.
While Chandra’s apology may be a step in the right direction, it underscores a larger issue—Indian news channels’ increasing reliance on sensationalism at the cost of credibility. As calls for media accountability grow louder, this moment should serve as a reckoning for the industry.
The question remains: Will news organizations learn from this episode, or will the cycle of irresponsible journalism continue, waiting for the next high-profile case to exploit?
