CBI, defence argue over filing additional papers | delhi | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Jul 29, 2017-Saturday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

CBI, defence argue over filing additional papers

During Thursday’s hearing in the Aarushi-Hemraj double-murder case, the defence and Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) lawyers argued over the 10 additional documents the agency had previously requested the court to be placed on record.

delhi Updated: Sep 27, 2012 23:41 IST
HT Correspondent

During Thursday’s hearing in the Aarushi-Hemraj double-murder case, the defence and Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) lawyers argued over the 10 additional documents the agency had previously requested the court to be placed on record. These documents have now become a bone of contention between the two sides and could prove vital to the case.

On September 25, the CBI had requested the court to place on record important documents relating to seizure memos, reports of DNA finger-printing examination, several CDs, call detail records, e-mails and Orkut profile reports as evidence.

The prime issue of contention on Thursday was a letter from the Centre for DNA Fingerprinting and Diagnostics (CDFD) Hyderabad, regarding a typographical error related to a ‘pillow cover’ and a ‘pillow with cover’.

Defence lawyers argued that the pillow cover recovered from the previous suspect Krishna's room was found positive for Hemraj’s DNA. On the other hand, the CBI counsel maintained that the serial numbers of the two got interchanged due to a typographical error because of which it seemed the pillow cover had Hemraj’s DNA, which was actually found on the pillow with cover.

This error was clarified by CDFD Hyderabad through a letter.

The defence argued that the CBI simply listed the documents to be produced without giving any detail of their contents.

“The CBI has selectively filed the documents and did not place complete documents on record. The trial is at a crucial stage and the CBI wants to fill up the lacunae in their evidence and the possibility of fabrication of documents cannot be ruled out,” Shishodia added.

The defence raised strong objections and requested the court to reject CBI’s application.

On the other hand, CBI special public prosecutor RK Saini cited a Supreme Court ruling and maintained that additional documents can be produced in the court if not submitted at the time of filing of a report or chargesheet.

An order is likely to be passed on September 29.