‘Parents killed Aarushi talwar’
26 Nov 2013 12:05 AM GMT
Aarushi, the 14-year-old only child of Talwars, was found dead with her throat slit and head battered in her room in an upmarket apartment block in Noida on the intervening night of 15-16 May 2008. The body of the initial suspect, 45-year old Hemraj from Nepal, was found on the terrace of the apartment block a day later.
While both have been convicted for murder (302 of IPC) and destruction of evidence (201 of IPC), Rajesh has also been convicted for misleading the police (203) into filing a wrong FIR. Holding the dentist couple guilty, Additional Sessions Judge Shyam Lal fixed Tuesday for announcing the quantum of sentence in the case after hearing arguments on sentencing.
Aarushi, a class nine student at a prestigious school, was found murdered just days before her birthday. CBI based its case on circumstantial evidence, saying that it led to only one conclusion that the Talwar couple had murdered their daughter and domestic servant after finding them in an objectionable position in Aarushi’s room. The Talwars argued they did not kill their daughter and domestic help and the CBI had reached at its conclusion based on presumptions, conjectures and surmises.
The case, which had grabbed media headlines and has been one of the most talked about ones in the country, saw many twists and turns in the last five and half years. The case was initially investigated by the Noida Police but later transferred to the CBI by the then UP chief minister Mayawati after the state police got flak from all quarters for the way it handled the matter in public domain. The CBI initially debunked the Noida police line but finally came to back it.
Noida Police had arrested Rajesh, suspecting the case to be an act of honour killing. They had said that Aarushi and Hemraj were killed by Talwars after they found them in objectionable position. When the case was transferred to the CBI, the agency gave a clean chit to Talwars and arrested Talwars’ lab assistant and two others. Later, the three suspects got out on bail after the CBI failed to get any concrete evidence against them.
Once the second CBI team was put in place, it reported that circumstantial evidence pointed towards Talwars’ involvement. However, in the trial court, it said that in absence of material evidence against Talwars it was filing a closure report. The trial court did not accept this closure report and asked the Talwars to face trial.
While both have been convicted for murder (302 of IPC) and destruction of evidence (201 of IPC), Rajesh has also been convicted for misleading the police (203) into filing a wrong FIR. Holding the dentist couple guilty, Additional Sessions Judge Shyam Lal fixed Tuesday for announcing the quantum of sentence in the case after hearing arguments on sentencing.
Aarushi, a class nine student at a prestigious school, was found murdered just days before her birthday. CBI based its case on circumstantial evidence, saying that it led to only one conclusion that the Talwar couple had murdered their daughter and domestic servant after finding them in an objectionable position in Aarushi’s room. The Talwars argued they did not kill their daughter and domestic help and the CBI had reached at its conclusion based on presumptions, conjectures and surmises.
The case, which had grabbed media headlines and has been one of the most talked about ones in the country, saw many twists and turns in the last five and half years. The case was initially investigated by the Noida Police but later transferred to the CBI by the then UP chief minister Mayawati after the state police got flak from all quarters for the way it handled the matter in public domain. The CBI initially debunked the Noida police line but finally came to back it.
Noida Police had arrested Rajesh, suspecting the case to be an act of honour killing. They had said that Aarushi and Hemraj were killed by Talwars after they found them in objectionable position. When the case was transferred to the CBI, the agency gave a clean chit to Talwars and arrested Talwars’ lab assistant and two others. Later, the three suspects got out on bail after the CBI failed to get any concrete evidence against them.
Once the second CBI team was put in place, it reported that circumstantial evidence pointed towards Talwars’ involvement. However, in the trial court, it said that in absence of material evidence against Talwars it was filing a closure report. The trial court did not accept this closure report and asked the Talwars to face trial.
Next Story
