After the Allahabad High Court ordered the release of Rajesh and Nupur Talwar who were sentenced to life imprisonment four years ago by a special CBI court for the murder of their teenaged daughter Aarushi and domestic help Hemraj in May 2008, it lashed out at the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for not handling the matter properly.
After the Allahabad High Court ordered the release of Rajesh and Nupur Talwar who were sentenced to life imprisonment four years ago by a special CBI court for the murder of their teenaged daughter Aarushi and domestic help Hemraj in May 2008, it lashed out at the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for not handling the matter properly. According to a report by The Indian Express, the Allahabad HC gave a number of instances ranging from “subjective findings” by medical and forensic experts to the tutoring of a witness and planting of another, evidence tampering to “deliberate concealment” of evidence where the investigative agency allowed the case to slip. These instances, recorded by the High Court bench of Justices B K Narayana and A K Mishra in their 273-page judgment Thursday, span every crucial aspect of the case and its investigation. Here are 5 mistakes CBI made, as per Allahabad HC:
1. The CBI had said that the reason behind this double murder was grave and sudden provocation after Rajesh Talwar found his daughter and Hemraj in a “compromising position”. However, the Allahabad High Court stated that the postmortem report didn’t mention that she was subjected to any kind of sexual assault.
2. The bench said that the testimony of Bharti Mandal who was a maid employed by the Talwars, during cross-examination indicated she was a “tutored witness”. The bench pointed to a statement in her cross-examination where she said, “Whatever was taught/explained to me, the same statement I have stated.”
3. Sanjay Chauhan who was gave a statement that he had visited the Talwar home on May 16, 2008 was a planted witness as per the bench as the CBI has not been able to come up with any cogent answer to the query of the defence as to how the CBI came to know about the visit of Sanjay Chauhan to L-32 Jalvayu Vihar.
4. CBI had said that Rajesh Talwar used a golf club to strike Aarushi and Hemraj. However, the bench dismissed it by saying that, “There is evidence on record showing that the golf club, which was handed over by appellant Dr Rajesh Talwar, was neither properly sealed nor kept in Maalkhana and the same had been tampered with.”
5. Dismissing the claims that internet remained active on the night of murder, the High Court said, “The explanation that the appellants knew nothing as they were sleeping cannot be termed as no explanation and/or false explanation as from the evidence adduced by the CBI itself it was proved that if someone was sleeping in the Talwars’ bedroom with the air-conditioners on which were a bit noisy, it was not possible for them to have heard the sounds of moving footsteps, closing and opening of doors inside the Talwars’ flat. Thus, the trial court, in our opinion, committed a patent error of law in holding that the appellants were awake throughout the fateful night.”