INVESTIGATING AN INVESTIGATION
Avirook Sen’s compelling book on the Aarushi case highlights the CBI’s willingness to resort to unethical means to close cases, the insensitivity of the judiciary, and the appalling bad luck of the Talwars
You covered the Aarushi case... Yeah. Fragments of the book were written here and there but it came together only post the judgement. The book is substantially different from the reports (in Mumbai Mirror). There was a lot of additional reporting that I did post the verdict because the verdict itself raised many questions for me and I thought why not pursue those? The CBI’s AGL Kaul who manipulated things, what could have been his motivations? For a number of these people, it’s value within their organization. Kaul was on that ODI (Officers of Doubtful Integrity) list already; he had been bypassed for promotion a couple of times, so it was important that he rise at least to the rank of SP. It’s a personal motivation. Kaul had a track record of doing this kind of thing. He’s done it in the Shehla Masood case; he’s done it in the Amit Jogi case, so this sort of thing is actually encouraged in the CBI, evidently.
The CBI comes out as horrible in the book. Just like mafia people and hitmen, I think the agencies have people who can close. Kaul had value within the organization because of that. Doesn’t the CBI have an operating procedure that says you can’t do certain things? I’m sure they do but… Take a simple example from the book: Why did they create that email ID? (referring to the deliberately cruel hemraj.jalvayuvihar@gmail.com ID that Kaul created to communicate with the Talwars).
It reveals much about methods and mindset. Exactly. And what is the default reaction when you ask a question about it? My interaction with the CBI spokesperson Dharini Mishra — the first thing they say is ‘Oh this is not possible’. And then you have to tell them, ‘I’m sorry I’m not making this up. I’m just reading your submission to the Supreme Court, no less. I’m anticipating a question from you: why did all these people go after the Talwars?
It could happen to anybody. This is true when you get embroiled in something like this. I’m trying to explain to you why this is such a perfect storm. You have an investigator who has a track record of unscrupulousness, who has been given a brief to close the case. He comes into the case when, out of all the five suspects, only two are within reach. There was a media problem, which put pressure on the new director. People asked, ‘Why isn’t this case closed?’ Then a forensic scientist comes into the picture, who has a superbly fertile imagination. He should be writing in Nature because he can divine from photographs the fact that there are two blood groups present in the splatter on the wall.
How could the court not see all this? The question to ask actually is does the court have the capacity to understand forensic science? A lot of the reports are self-interpretable. But you need to apply your mind to it. So you’ve got, first, the investigator, then you’ve got the forensic scientist. Third, you have a judge who’s called Saza Lal, who can’t, in my interview of him, remember a single person who he has acquitted. When you put these together… There’s no conspiracy here. What about the Talwars themselves? To lose your child and then to be accused of murdering her… This is the question that I asked them several times. Nupur says the basic fact is that ‘Look, we don’t even have the time to grieve’. She is ridden with guilt about this. What was the most rewarding part of the project? As a piece of work, I’ve nailed it. Because I was able to keep to one discipline and make every damn thing in the book attributable. There’s not a single line in the book which I can’t point to a source. So there is no unnamed source. It was very gratifying.
What do you regret?
If I could have gotten to the servants, it would have added to the book. I did try
but it was a dead end.
Nobody knows where they are?
Nobody that I spoke to.
But Kaul would have known. Yes, but Kaul is not reachable. Kaul died exactly on the day that I finished the manuscript. Strange coincidence. I’ve been getting this: “How are you speaking so ill of the dead?” My counter question to this is “OK, the 13-year-old girl who died; what did this man say about this dead girl in the court and to the public?”