Aarushi murder: Examination of UP cop continues
Defence lawyers representing Rajesh Talwar and Nupur Talwar continued to cross-examine UP police “photographer-cum-forensic expert” Chunni Lal Gautam for the fourth consecutive hearing at a Ghaziabad Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court on Monday. Peeyush Khandelwal reports.Updated: Jul 03, 2012 00:16 IST
Defence lawyers representing Rajesh Talwar and Nupur Talwar continued to cross-examine UP police “photographer-cum-forensic expert” Chunni Lal Gautam for the fourth consecutive hearing at a Ghaziabad Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court on Monday.
Gautam was called to click photographs and lift finger-prints from the scene of crime after the double murders in May 2008. During his cross-examination on Monday, Gautam told the court that he was not an expert in investigating the scene of crime.
The defence counsel asked Gautam to match the negatives with pictures taken from the scene of crime.
Gautam was able to match some of the photographs with their negatives while he could not relate with some of them due to different reasons.
He said he did not know whether the photographs, clicked by him, were shown to him at the CBI’s office or not.
The defence lawyers now requested the court to place the original negatives of the 23 pictures taken from the scene of crime on record. These photographs are of vital importance to the case as there is no direct evidence available.
In his previous statements before the court on June 8, Gautam had recollected that Aarushi’s body was covered with a white sheet and her bed-sheet had no creases.
He had said there was an injury mark above her eyes and her throat was half-slit. An AC-remote was kept on her bed and the toys on it had no blood marks, he said. He also stated the position of the clothes Aarushi wore that night.
These points could prove vital to the CBI’s theory of “dressing up of scene of crime” which they had stated in their closure report filed in December, 2010. The defence lawyers had earlier said Gautam provided certain additional information in his statements before the court as compared to his previous CrPC 161 statements recorded in July 2008 and March 2010.
Defence lawyers wanted to confront him with his previous CrPC 161 statements but their application was dismissed by the court. The hearing will continue on Tuesday.