Aarushi Murder Case: CBI To Move SC Against Order Acquitting Talwars

New Delhi: With Allahabad High Court acquitting Rajesh and Nupur Talwar in the Aarushi and Hemraj murder case, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has decided to move the Supreme Court to challenge the order.

A division bench of the Allahabad HC on Thursday observed that the Talwar couple needs to be given a benefit of doubt and a chain of evidence could not be established against the dentist couple.

The CBI lawyer Anurag Khanna had earlier said that the investigation agency would go to the Supreme Court only after consulting with its top officials.

Defence counsel Tanveer Ahmed Mir said the release of Talwars from Ghaziabad jail is unlikely to happen before Friday as the order needs to be released and a copy of it needs to reach the jail authorities. However, even if the CBI files an appeal before the Supreme Court, the Talwars will stay out of jail.

As Talwar couple had appealed in the HC against the lower court order, a few investigation botch-ups by the central agency were highlighted before the HC.

There was a failure on part of the CBI to secure crime scene for over 24 hours, leading to the loss of crucial forensic evidence. The court has noted that the investigation hypothesis by CBI was not conclusive. The fact of introducing honour killing hypothesis, saying Talwars committed the crime in a fit of rage after finding Aarushi in an ‘objectionable position’ with Hemraj, played a crucial role for the HC to acquit the dentist couple.

There were also differing post-mortem reports. While one mentioned a “prominent opening” of Aarushi’s private parts, the other mentioned “NAD (no abnormality detected)” in the section on the teenager’s private parts.

The CBI court had in its 2013 judgment held the Talwar couple guilty of killing their 14-year-old daughter Aarushi after noting that the Evidence Act provisions had transferred the onus on the parents to explain how the teenager was murdered.

But the HC on Thursday stated that cases where you depend on circumstantial evidence, the benefit of the doubt goes to the accused. The accused can be held guilty only if the facts established are entirely consistent with the guilt.