CBI, CDFD Con­nived to Put Tal­wars in Dock, Says HC

Agency will study the judge­ment in en­tirety and such al­le­ga­tions may be chal­lenged be­fore SC: CBI of­fi­cial

The Economic Times - - Pure Politics - Aman.Sharma@ times­group.com

New Delhi: Two of the coun­try’s pre­mier agen­cies, the Cen­tral Bu­reau of In­ves­ti­ga­tion (CBI) and Cen­tre for DNA Finger­print­ing and Di­ag­nos­tics (CDFD) in Hy­der­abad, “con­nived” to re­move a key ev­i­dence that was point­ing to the in­no­cence of the Tal­war cou­ple, Al­la­habad High Court has noted in its 273-page judge­ment re­leased on Fri­day.

A se­nior CBI of­fi­cial, speak­ing on the con­di­tion of anonymity, told ET that the agency will study the judge­ment in its en­tirety and such al­le­ga­tions may be chal­lenged be­fore the Supreme Court if the agency prefers an ap­peal. The HC judge­ment while ac­quit­ting the Tal­war cou­ple for the Arushi-Hem­raj mur­ders has de­mol­ished each point put for­ward by CBI but the most damn­ing in­dict­ment is CBI’s “ma­nip­u­la­tion” of a pil­low cover, which the HC said was “the clinch­ing piece of ev­i­dence” in the cou­ple’s favour.

Apur­ple-colour pil­low cover was seized by CBI from ser­vant Kr­ishna’s house on June 14, 2008. Be­fore that, a pil­low cover had been seized from de­ceased ser­vant Hem­raj’s room by CBI on June 1, 2008. Both were sent to CDFD, Hy­der­abad for DNA tests. The CDFD in a re­port on Novem­ber 6, 2008 said the pur­ple-colour cover seized from Kr­ishna’s house car­ries the DNA of Hem­raj – “un­equiv­o­cally es­tab­lishes the pres­ence of Kr­ishna in the house of the Tal­wars on the night of the oc­cur­rence” the HC has ruled.

But three years af­ter this re­port, later, a CBI in­ves­ti­ga­tor in per­son vis­ited the CDFD on March 17, 2011 sub­mit­ting a let­ter ask­ing if a “ty­po­graph­i­cal er­ror” had led to mix­ing up of the re­ports on the two pil­low cov­ers and if Hem­raj’s DNA was in fact fo- und only on his own pil­low cover. CDFD promptly replied on March 24, 2011 ad­mit­ting to the er­ror. HC has noted that CBI never sub­mit­ted the pho­tographs of the two pil­low cov­ers be­fore the trial court and the said ma­te­rial seems to have been tam­pered by CBI.

“The tenor of let­ter dated 24.3.2011 on the face of it clearly in­di­cates that the CDFD Hy­der­abad sim­ply abided by the cryp­tic sug­ges­tion given by the In­ves­ti­gat­ing Of­fi­cer on 17.3.2011 and vir­tu­ally sat­is­fied his re­quire­ment. The afore­said ex­er­cise on the part of CBI clearly puts the two pho­tographs of the con­tro­ver­sial ex­hibits, clar­i­fi­ca­tion­sought­fromCDFDHy­der­abad and ul­ti­mately the clar­i­fi­ca­tion given as de­sired by the In­ves­ti­gat­ing Of­fi­cer un­der a strong shadow of doubt and gives rise to a very strong sus­pi­cion that the en­tire afore­said ex­er­cise was un­der­taken by the In­ves­ti­gat­ing Of­fi­cer in con­nivance with the CDFD Hy­der­abad to re­move from the record any ev­i­dence which was in con­so­nance with in­no­cence of the Tal­wars,” the HC has noted. The HC has ques­tioned why no CBI of­fi­cer no­ticed any dis­crep­ancy or er­ror for three years in the CDFD re­port sub­mit­ted in 2008 be­fore in­ves­ti­gat­ing of­fi­cer AGL Kaul flagged the same in 2011. HC said CBI could of­fer “no sat­is­fac­tory re­ply” on what led to Kaul to doubt the cor­rect­ness of the 2008 CDFD re­port. “The CDFD re­port in 2008 in­di­cated that that Kr­ishna was present in the Tal­war's flat when Hem­raj was mur­dered and it is on ac­count of the afore­said fact that Hem­raj blood got em­bossed on the hair of Kr­ishna which in turn got em­bossed on his pur­ple colour pil­low cover which was ad­mit­tedly seized from the Kr­ishna's premises,” the HC judge­ment has said. HC also noted the tes­ti­mony of a CDFD sci­en­tific ex­pert, SPR Prasad, be­fore the trial court in which he said seals put by CDFD on all ex­hibits sent by the CBI seemed to be tam­pered with. “He cat­e­gor­i­cally de­posed be­fore the trial court that all his seals have been bro­ken, all his en­velopes have been torn open and he can­not say who broke these seals, who tore open the en­velopes, when this was done and why this was done,” HC said.

FILE PHOTO

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India

© PressReader. All rights reserved.