Arguments on framing of charges in the Arushi Talwar and Hemraj double murder began at a sessions court in Ghaziabad today, with the CBI demanding that Rajesh and Nupur Talwar face trial for destruction of evidence as well as giving misleading information, apart from the charge of murder.
While the CBI completed its arguments on Tuesday, the counsel representing the Talwars were unable to complete their account and the proceedings will continue tomorrow.
“We have asked for charges under Sections 302 (murder), 201 (destruction of evidence) and 203 (giving false information) against Rajesh and Nupur Talwar. Apart from committing the murder of their daughter Arushi and their domestic help Hemraj, they also misled the investigating agency by filing a false FIR against Hemraj when the murder of Arushi was first discovered,” CBI senior prosecutor R K Saini said.
Arguing in the court of Additional Sessions Judge Shyam Lal, the CBI said that as there were only four persons in the house that night, including Arushi and Hemraj, the onus to explain the events of the night fell on the Talwars.
The CBI also quoted from the statements of the guard of the Noida colony where the Talwars lived and the murders took place, which said that “nobody entered or left the house post 9 pm”.
Also used by the CBI was the account of the Talwars’ driver, who confirmed that when “he went to the house to hand over the car keys at 9.50 pm that night, all four persons were present in the house”.
The CBI added that the wound impressions on the head matched that of a golf club found in the house. “The slits on the throats of both Arushi and Hemraj could only have been made by surgically trained persons.”
The counsel also referred to the postmortem reports of both Arushi and Hemraj where her private parts were said to be “dilated unnaturally”. They said that “Hemraj’s body was bloated because it was not discovered for two days, and his penis seemed to be swollen”.
On their part, the counsel representing the Talwars said that all the evidence was circumstantial and there was no direct evidence pinning the blame on the couple. “The Supreme Court has said that there must be a chain of evidence so certain that it leaves no doubt of the guilt of the accused. In this case though, there is no such