ALLAHABAD: The CBI, which has submitted a unique depart petition (SLP) within the Supreme Court difficult the acquittal of Rajesh and Nupur Talwar within the Aarushi homicide case, had only closing week won an in depth 20-page opinion from its senior empanelled lawyer Anurag Khanna, who have been representing the agency within the Allahabad top court docket within the top profile case.
The opinion deals with grounds such as absence of outsider, behavior of the couple derived from the statements of witnesses who met the Talwars on 16 May, 2008 and inconsistent sound simulation check findings.
According to Khanna’s opinion, “the Allahabad top court docket” had wrongly intended, in its acquittal order on October 12, 2017, that it was incumbent at the CBI to determine that the accused have been wide awake”.
“No outsider had come into the house between 10 pm and 6 am, nor there was any pressured entry. The CBI, has succeeded to prove this and also during the testimony of Umesh, the driver who noticed the 2 deseased alive with two accused (Rajesh and Nupur Talwar) at 10 pm on 15th May 2008 and the testimony of Bharti Mandal, who was the first to reach the house at 6 am and located the house to be locked from within” the opinion has stated.
The opinion has rejected the idea that the couple have been asleep all over the murders, saying their statements are recorded underneath CrPc segment 313, which doesn't have any evidentiary price.
“The court docket will have accredited the rationale given via the accused provided that that they had placed some proof on report to prove they have been dozing via either bringing any oral or documentary piece of proof on report. The Talwars failed to do so, hence the court docket erred in accepting their rationalization of dozing the entire night. Moreover, the CBI has placed multiple proof on report to prove that the accused were not dozing at the night the murders took place.
The opinion has additionally sought to counter the sound simulation check findings, in keeping with which “if anyone was dozing within the Talwars’ bedroom with air conditioners on, then it could no longer be conceivable for that particular person to have heard the sounds of transferring foot steps”.
“The check advised that a person within the Talwars’ bedroom would listen the noise of a fork falling at the flooring, however would no longer listen anything if he was in deep sleep. The check fails to take into the account the magnitude of the noise that will have come at the night when the act of assaulting the sufferer on her head via a blunt weapon was being carried out,” the opinion has stated.
“The top court docket erred via no longer giving due regard due to the fact that Aarushi’s room was right next to the room of her parents, with a wooden panel dividing the 2 rooms. This would have made the life of the proposition of dozing the entire night relatively unimaginable to occur.
The opinion deals with grounds such as absence of outsider, behavior of the couple derived from the statements of witnesses who met the Talwars on 16 May, 2008 and inconsistent sound simulation check findings.
According to Khanna’s opinion, “the Allahabad top court docket” had wrongly intended, in its acquittal order on October 12, 2017, that it was incumbent at the CBI to determine that the accused have been wide awake”.
“No outsider had come into the house between 10 pm and 6 am, nor there was any pressured entry. The CBI, has succeeded to prove this and also during the testimony of Umesh, the driver who noticed the 2 deseased alive with two accused (Rajesh and Nupur Talwar) at 10 pm on 15th May 2008 and the testimony of Bharti Mandal, who was the first to reach the house at 6 am and located the house to be locked from within” the opinion has stated.
The opinion has rejected the idea that the couple have been asleep all over the murders, saying their statements are recorded underneath CrPc segment 313, which doesn't have any evidentiary price.
“The court docket will have accredited the rationale given via the accused provided that that they had placed some proof on report to prove they have been dozing via either bringing any oral or documentary piece of proof on report. The Talwars failed to do so, hence the court docket erred in accepting their rationalization of dozing the entire night. Moreover, the CBI has placed multiple proof on report to prove that the accused were not dozing at the night the murders took place.
The opinion has additionally sought to counter the sound simulation check findings, in keeping with which “if anyone was dozing within the Talwars’ bedroom with air conditioners on, then it could no longer be conceivable for that particular person to have heard the sounds of transferring foot steps”.
“The check advised that a person within the Talwars’ bedroom would listen the noise of a fork falling at the flooring, however would no longer listen anything if he was in deep sleep. The check fails to take into the account the magnitude of the noise that will have come at the night when the act of assaulting the sufferer on her head via a blunt weapon was being carried out,” the opinion has stated.
“The top court docket erred via no longer giving due regard due to the fact that Aarushi’s room was right next to the room of her parents, with a wooden panel dividing the 2 rooms. This would have made the life of the proposition of dozing the entire night relatively unimaginable to occur.
CBI took ‘opinion’ on Aarushi case last week
![CBI took ‘opinion’ on Aarushi case last week]()
Reviewed by Kailash
on
March 09, 2018
Rating:
