Case Comment: State of Uttar Pradesh vs Rajesh Talwar & Others.

The Noida Double murder case alludes to the murder of 14-year-old Aarushi Talwar and 45-year-old Hemraj Banjade, a household worker, employed by her family in Noida, India. The two were executed on the night of 15–16 May 2008 at Aarushi's home. The case excited open enthusiasm as a whodunit story, and got overwhelming media scope. The astounding media scope, which included lewd claims against Aarushi and the suspects, was scrutinized by numerous as a trial by media. At the point when Aarushi's body was found on 16 May, the missing hireling Hemraj was considered as the primary suspect. In any case, the following day, his incompletely deteriorated body was found on the terrace. the police were intensely scrutinized for neglecting to secure the wrongdoing scene quickly. Subsequent to decision out the family's ex-workers, the police considered Aarushi's folks—Dr. Rajesh Talwar and Nupur Talwar—as the prime suspects. The police presumed that Rajesh had killed the two in the wake of discovering them in a "shocking" position, or in light of the fact that Rajesh's asserted additional conjugal undertaking had prompted his coercion by Hemraj and an encounter with Aarushi. The allegations goaded the Talwars' family and companions, who blamed the police for encircling the Talwars to conceal the messed up examination. The case was then exchanged to the CBI, which absolved the guardians and suspected the Talwars' colleague Krishna alongside two household workers—Raj Kumar and Vijay. In view of the "narco" cross examination directed on the three men, the CBI speculated that they had murdered Aarushi after an endeavored rape, and Hemraj for being a witness. The CBI was blamed for utilizing questionable strategies to extricate an admission, and all the three men were discharged after it couldn't locate any strong proof against them. In 2009, the CBI gave over the examination to another group, which prescribed shutting the case because of basic crevices in the proof. In view of conditional confirmation, it named Rajesh Talwar as the sole suspect, however declined to charge him because of absence of any hard proof. The guardians restricted the conclusion, calling CBI's doubt on Rajesh as outlandish. In this manner, a court rejected the CBI's case that there was insufficient proof, and requested procedures against the Talwars.[1]

Judgment

On 25 November 2013, a special CBI court held Rajesh and Nupur Talwar guilty for the two murders. The Special Judge Shyam Lal convicted the couple for murder, destruction of evidence, misleading the probe and filing a wrong FIR On 26 November 2013, they were sentenced to life imprisonment for the twin murders

The Talwar family called the verdict a miscarriage of justice, and alleged that the points proving innocence of Rajesh and Nupur were not produced by the CBI before the court. In January 2014, the couple challenged the decision in the Allahabad High Court.[2]

^COMMENT

If the CBI had sent its story, ‘Why and How Aarushi Talwar’s Parents Killed Her’, to say the New York Times, the newspaper would have rejected the piece citing lack of substance. Can a story that does not meet the standards of quality journalism be good enough to convict two people in India?

Justice is as much about protecting the innocent as punishing the guilty, but the trial in the Aarushi-Hemraj murder case seemed determined to go for conviction even when the prosecution could not prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

This verdict will go down in legal history as a dark chapter. It has been a grievous miscarriage of justice. It has bought into an absurd and fabricated narrative that the prosecution came up with. It has not bothered to challenge the many loopholes in the prosecution story or paid attention to the legitimate questions raised by the defense counsel. The Talwars were not allowed to present their witnesses or evidence that could turn the tide of the case. It should have looked into the most important evidence in the case — the pillowcase with Hemraj’s blood and DNA that was recovered from Krishna’s room. It should have asked why the bloodstained khukri was not sent for advanced DNA testing. It should have allowed the 14 defense witnesses to testify. The trial was mystifyingly one-sided. Justice is as much about protecting the innocent as punishing the guilty, but this trial seemed determined to go for conviction even when the prosecution could not prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

It would appear from the language of the verdict that the judgment has emerged not out of the merits of the case but the slander and prejudice that surrounded it. The judiciary is one of the most important pillars of a democracy and we expect it to uphold the highest standards.[3]

Their honor-killing theory does not stand up to scrutiny either, based as it is, on the premise that Hemraj was killed in Aarushi’s room when not a single trace of his blood was found there. What also boggles the mind is the way they blatantly ignored the promising leads that emerged from the narco analysis tests of the three servants in which they placed themselves at the scene of the crime on that fateful night. Instead, the CBI shifted the burden of proof onto the Talwars by suggesting, with the most simplistic logic, that in an apartment of four people with no forced entry, if two people were dead, then the other two must have done it.

Three different theories

The UP police initially said that Rajesh Talwar killed daughter Aarushi and servant Hemraj after he saw them in an ‘objectionable’ position. They couldn’t discover the murder weapon. The first CBI team worked on the theory that the murder was done by the servants who first raped and then killed her and since Hemraj was witness to it, he was taken to the terrace and killed. The second CBI team trashed the story of the servants being involved for want of evidence. Their investigation again pointed to the role of the parents. However, they filed a closure report which was not accepted by the trial court. The subsequent trial held the parents guilty of murder. [4]

The verdict was based on circumstantial evidence as key forensic evidence had been lost during two flawed investigations. Instead of that the Talwars were sentenced to life in prison.

The Unreliable Witnesses leads to Conviction

In September 2012, the defense claimed that the maid Bharati Mandal was a tutored witness, as she told the court Jo samjhaya gaya wahi bayan de rahi hu ("I am saying whatever I was explained.") However, Bharati denied that she had given any incorrect statement under CBI's pressure. The defence stated that this door was not closed, and presented Rajesh's driver Umesh as a witness, who stated that this outermost door could be opened by pushing it hard.

The apparently simple finding that the motive of the crime had been established perhaps hide behind it the grossest perversion. To establish that Rajesh Talwar had killed Aarushi and Hemraj because he saw them having sex in her room, one had to first prove that Hemraj was there. The prosecution also fails to give Evidence and Proper Justification regarding this Issue.

FAILURE OF TEST

The crime scene had been compromised, so CBI turned to polygraph test (lie-detector), brain-mapping tests and narco-analysis. Rajesh and Nupur cleared two lie-detector tests and a brain-mapping test, which did not find any evidence of lying on their part.

Weak evidences

In 2009, the CBI handed over the investigation to a new team, which recommended closing the case due to critical gaps in the evidence. Based on circumstantial evidence, it named Rajesh Talwar as the sole suspect, but refused to charge him due to lack of any hard evidence. The parents opposed the closure, calling CBI's suspicion on Rajesh as baseless. Subsequently, a court rejected the CBI's claim that there was not enough evidence, and ordered proceedings against the Talwars. In November 2013, the parents were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. Many critics argued that the judgment was based on weak evidence

In 2012, after Aarushi's parents were charged with the murder, the CBI claimed that according to the experts, the "dimensions of the striking distance" of one of Rajesh's golf clubs was identical to the dimensions of the injuries found on the bodies. Dr. Sunil Dohre testified that the weapon used for the U/V-shaped injuries could possibly be a golf club. The defence argued that the CBI officers had drawn the words "golf club" from Dohre's mouth. Talwars' lawyer stated that Aarushi had suffered a hairline fracture, and produced the forensic expert Dr. RK Sharma, who told the court that this fracture could not have been caused by a golf club.

The weapon used for slitting the throats of the victims was never found. The identical measurements of the lacerated wounds indicated that the same weapon was used on both the victims. In May 2008, the forensic scientists remarked that the wounds displayed a "clinical precision and careful thought", as they were inflicted at the right spot to cut the windpipe and dissect the vital left common carotid artery which supplies oxygenated blood to the The defence argued that a dentist's scalpel has a cutting surface of about a centimeter: the instrument is too delicate to cut through the carotid artery. According to the defence witness Dr. RK Sharma, the wounds could have been caused by surgical scalpel No. 10 (not used by dentists) or a kukri. brain. Initially, when the Noida police first suspected the parents, they stated that the weapon used was a "surgical knife". By June 2008, the CBI's suspicion had shifted to the three Nepalese men, and the weapon was believed to be a kukri, a type of Nepalese knife.

With every additional day that the Talwars languish in jail for a crime they did not commit, the system and we who unquestioningly support the system are guilty of perpetuating a glaring injustice. Justice for Aarushi and Hemraj cannot be delivered if the innocent is jailed and the guilty go scot-free.

As it were, the court’s verdict was on expected lines; the lynch mob had already made up its mind. The media, playing to the gallery, had done its bit in the deliverance of “justice”. In more ways than one, everyone had played Sherlock Holmes. Armchair detectives thrashed out the case on the Internet and the electronic media, doling out theories of how the murders had been committed.

Most of the nation seems to believe the couple are guilty. Some suspect they are innocent. Nobody knows for sure. Except the Central Bureau of Investigation, which does not have evidence.

Rajesh talwar- "We are living an unreal life for the past seven years," says Rajesh Talwar. "It is like living in a haze." we are deeply disappointed, hurt and anguished for being for being convicted for a crime that we have not committed. We refuse to feel defeated and will continue to fight for justice.”[5]