Advertisement

HindustanTimes Fri,01 Aug 2014

Hemraj wasn’t in Aarushi’s room: Defence lawyer

HT Correspondent , Hindustan Times  Ghaziabad, October 26, 2013
First Published: 01:31 IST(26/10/2013) | Last Updated: 01:39 IST(26/10/2013)

The defence lawyer in the Aarushi-Hemraj murder case on Friday rubbished the prosecution theory that domestic help Hemraj Banjade was present in the teenager’s room and that led to their murders on the intervening night of May 15-16, 2008.

Advertisement

Continuing with the final arguments on behalf of Rajesh and Nupur Talwar, defence lawyer Tanvir Ahmed Mir on Friday challenged the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe carried out between September and October 2009.

“The entire case against the Talwars was prepared during this time based on the scene of crime re-enactment report and testimonies of two post-mortem doctors. Had Hemraj been killed or attacked inside Aarushi’s room, there would have been his blood inside the room. But there was nothing there,” Mir told the court.

He argued that forensic expert BK Mahapatra had examined Aarushi’s clothes, mattresses, bedsheet, blankets and other items but had not found Hemraj’s blood on any of the items. “Similarly, nothing was found when Hemraj’s clothes were checked. Forensic serologist found only Aarushi’s blood in her room,” he added.

The defence lawyer argued that of the 24 fingerprints lifted from the scene of crime, none were of Hemraj. The counsel came down heavily on the two doctors — Dr Sunil Dohre and Dr Naresh Raj — and requested the court to pass strictures against the two for indulging in “blaspheming statements (sic) without any medical basis given  before the court”.

Dohre had mentioned about Aarushi’s private parts in statements before the court but had failed to mention the findings in the post-mortem report. Later, during his cross examination, the doctor had said these were his “subjective findings”.

Dr Naresh Raj had said Hemraj’s swollen private part indicated that either he had indulged in sexual act or was about to before his death.

“Dr Dohre did not mention his ‘subjective findings’ to any officer or committee but gave such statements only on September 30, 2009. Dr Naresh Raj did not mention his reasoning to anyone till he appeared before the court. The crime scene re-enactment report by Dr Dahiya and testimonies of the two doctors formed the prosecution’s theory of Hemraj’s presence in Aarushi’s room but they had no evidence to prove it,” Mir told the court.

The defence arguments will continue for Monday.


Advertisement
Advertisement
Most Popular
Advertisement
Advertisement
Copyright © 2014 HT Media Limited. All Rights Reserved