Arushi’s murder case is a mysterious case under which CBI could be found any evidence against any people who contacted with it.
So many criticisms had been drawn for CBI regarding its twists and turns while probing the sensational Arushi Talwar murder case at well protected Noida house in May 2008.
So the Supreme Court on Friday rejected the petition filed by the doctor couple, Rajesh and Nupur, seeking quashing of the summons issued to them by the trial court to face the prosecution , that give much comfort to the agency.
However claiming some credit for its “smart” move in the case, the agency’s former director Joginder Singh said: “If the trial court decided that the CBI’s closure report had enough evidence for trying Nupur and Rajesh Talwar, it was because the agency had placed all the details before it. It was an honest thing to do.”
In December 2010, being filed the closure report over case by giving relief to all the other suspects, CBI had pointed the needle of suspicion at the Talwars – in the trial court. It had not filed chargesheet like other because no evidence had found against the Talwars.
Over the criticism, Mr. Singh claimed, “The choice for the CBI was between the devil and the deep sea and it took the correct course by putting on record (in the closure report) the fact that it suspected the Talwars, but did not have clinching evidence against them.”
Commenting on the CBI’s performance, the senior advocate Kamini Jaiswal pointed her view that the trial court’s decision to reject the closure report and order a retrial of the Talwars did not wash away the agency’s mistakes. According to her CBI could be under pressure to not file a chargesheet. She said, “The CBI files a chargesheet in so many cases and I do not know what was so special about the Arushi murder probe.”
But according to CBI sources, the lack of material evidence on the UP Police, who were first on the scene of crime. Vital forensic evidence was washed away by the Talwars at that time.All the cases studied by legal advisers and permitted the CBI to file a chargesheet only when they thought the evidence was foolproof.
Moreover, calling Talwar’s petition a waste of judicial time, a bench of justices AK Ganguly and JS Kehar said, “It is an abuse of judicial time. We are flooded with such cases. We are ashamed by the manner in which power is being exercised.” The judges observed, “No trial can take place if such petitions are entertained.
There are mini trials taking place in this court.”
Finally rejection made on the plea over the Arushi’s murder case , the couple’s counsel Rebecca John reacted to this order and said, “There is nothing beyond this (the SC order).”