After two and half-year probes marked with botched up investigations, the Central Bureau of Investigation’s (CBI) had filed a closure report in the Aarushi-Hemraj double murder case in December 2010. In its report, the CBI had stated that it was unable to solve the case because of lack of evidence against the culprits. The report prepared by CBI investigator AGL Kaul was filed in a Ghaziabad court, however, it was rejected the court hearing the matter. Here’s the full text of the report:
Brief facts of the Case
1. Ms. Arushi daughter of Dr. Rajesh Talwar and Dr. Nupur Talwar, R/o L-32 Jalvayu Vihar, Sec-25, Noida was found murdered in the morning of 16.05.08 in her room. On the basis of written complaint received from Dr. Rajesh Talwar, a case under crime-no. 695/08 was registered u/s 302 IPC at PS, Sect-20 Noida on 16.5.2008. Govt. of Uttar Pradesh issued a notification no. 1937-VI-P-3-2008-15(48) P/2008, Lucknow. dtd. 29.05.08 giving consent for transfer of investigation of this case to CBI. Thereafter a notification was issued by DOPT, Govt. of India, New Delhi on 31.05.08 whereby the investigation of this case was transferred to CBI. In pursuance of these notifications case crime no. 695/08 mentioned above was registered by CBI as RC1(S)/2008/SCR-III/CBI/New Delhi on 31.05.08.
Investigation by UP Police (16.5.2008 to 31.05.2008)
2. On 16.5.2008, Dr. Rajesh Talwar in his written complaint had alleged that his servant Hemraj had killed his daughter in the night og 15/16.05.2008 and that he was missing. However the body of Hemraj, servant of Dr. Rajesh Talwar who was alleged to have killed Aarushi, was recovered on 17.05.08 from the terrace of the residence of Dr. Rajesh Talwar. The post mortem of deceased Aarushi was conducted by Dr. Sunil Kumar Dohare on 16-5-08. The scene of crime was inspected by the Investigating Officer on 16.5.2008. During inspection of the scene of crime, UP Police observed that the flat of Dr. Rajesh Talwar was secure from all sides and there were no signs of an forcible entry from outside. No theft og property was reported by the inmates of the house. The police personnel, after inspecting the scene of crime, took photographs of the scene of crime and also took various items in their possession. There included the blood soaked clothing and bedding of victim Aarushi, few bottles of cold drinks and a Ballantine Scotch whisky bottle which was seized from the dining table of Dr. Rajesh Talwar.
3. During investigation by U.P. Police, Dr. Rajesh Talwar was arrested on 23.05.2008 and produced in the court at Ghaziabad on 24.05.2008. On 25.07.2008 the court granted three days police custody which was extended till 30.05.2008. Thereafter, Dr. Rajesh Talwar was sent to judicial custody on 30.05.2008.
Investigation by CBI (31.5.2008 – till date)
4. The CBI took Dr. Rajesh Talwar in custody from 1.06.08 to 04.06.08. During this period he was interrogated in detail but no recovery was made and no evidence was found against him. His judicial custody was extended on the request of CBI till 11.07.08 when finally CBI submitted to the court that “The scientific examination results could not connect accused Rajesh Talwar with the crime and that in view of the above circumstances further judicial custody remand of accused Rajesh Talwar was not required in the interest of justice”. The Hon’ble Court granted bail to Dr. Rajesh Talwar on 11.07.08.
Sequence of events during investigation
5. Investigation has revealed that Dr. Rajesh Talwar was residing at Flat No. L-32, Sec-25, Jalvayu Vihar, Noida alongwith his wife Dr. Nupur Talwar and their only daughter Ms. Aarushi. Hemraj was working as their servant and was residing in the servant room within the flat of Dr. Rajesh Talwar. The flat of Dr. Rajesh Talwar composed of three bedrooms, one drawing cum dining room and one servant quarter, all within an area of approximately 1300 Sq.ft. The master bedroom which was used by Dr. Rajesh Talwar and Dr. Nupur Talwar and the bedroom being used by Aarushi were adjacent to each other. Some portion of the common wall between these rooms was made of plywood partition. Both the rooms were equipped with AC. The room of Dr. Talwar had a window AC whereas the room of Aarushi had a split Ac. During the night of the incident both the ACs were on. The distance between the bed of the Talwar couple and Aarushi was around 7-8 ft. Aarushi was a student of DPS, Noida, reading in class 9th.
6. On 15/5/08 afternoon after school was over, Aasushi was picked by her mother Dr. Nupur at about 1.30 p.m. After returning to their residence Aarushi and her mother stayed home. Before lunch Dr. Vandana Talwar w/o Dr. Dinesh Talwar (brother of Dr. Rajesh Talwar) reached residence of Dr. Rajesh Talwar at Noida. Dr. Vandana Talwar, Dr. Nupur Talwar and Aarushi had lunch together. Dr. Vandana Talwar remained there till 3.30-4pm, when she left to pick up her son and then went to her clinic. She returned at around 7.30 P.m. and both of them remained at home till return of Dr. Rajesh Talwar in the night.
7. On 15/05/2008 at around 9.30pm, Dr. Rajesh Talwar returned home in his car driven by his driver Umesh, who then went to park the car in the garage of Shri Chitnis, father in law of Dr. Rajesh Talwar. Umesh thereafter went to the residence of Dr. Talwar and handed over the keys of the car and bag of Dr. Talwar to Hemraj. AT that time, Umesh saw Dr. Nupur and Aarushi near the dining table and Dr. Talwar coming out from his bedroom.
8. On 15/5/08 itself, a packet was delivered at the residence of Dr. Talwar by courier which was received by Hemraj. This contained a digital camera which was ordered by Dr. Talwar through the internet. Dr. Talwar on his return at night saw the packet carried it to his bedroom and kept it in his almirah. This carema was purchased by Dr. Talwar as a gift for Aarushi for her birthday which was on 24.05.2008. After dinner, Dr. Nupur Talwar alongwith Aarushi went to Aarushi’s room. Dr. Nupur persuaded Dr. Rajesh Talwar that the camera be gifted to Aarushi that night itself instead of waiting for her birthday. Dr. Nupur Talwar then took the camera to Aarushi’s toom and handed over the camera to Aarushi. According to the Talwar’s Aarushi took a few photographs from the camera which included photographs of herself and her parents. The wall clock which [illegible text] the photograph shows that these photographs were taken at [illegible text]. Thereafter Dr. Rajesh Talwar and Dr. Nupur Talwar went to their bedroom while Aarushi remained in their bedroom. Both the bedrooms are adjacent and have a plywood partition between them.
9. During investigation it was established that on 15.05.2008 Dr. Rajesh Talwar used the internet and the last access he made was around [illegible text] He was on net till at least 00:08 AM of 16.05.2008. At about [illegible text] he had asked Dr. Nupur Talwar to switch on the internet router which was in the room of Aarushi. A close friend of Aarushi named Anmol had rang the landline of Dr. Talwar (which is kept in Dr. Talwar’s bedroom at around 12 midnight to talk to Aarushi. The telephone kept ringing but no one picked up the phone.
10. There is no direct evidence of what happened between 12.08 midnight and 6 AM next day morning but circumstantial evidence is available [illegible text] the probable sequence of events.
11. On 16.5.08 morning at around 6 am maid Bharati rang the doorbell of Talwar as per her routine Normally Hemraj used to open the door to allow her inside. However on [illegible text] the door bell [illegible text] Nupur told Bharati that the middle grill door was locked. Nupur told Bhatati that the middle grill door was locked. Dr. Nupur Talwar then brought keys from the room of Hemraj and tried to open the middle grill door from inside but could not do so. Dr. Nupur told Bharati that the door may be locked from outside at which Bharati told Dr. Nupur to throw the keys from the balcony. As per Dr. Nupur’s statement she was not aware of the murder of Aarushi till she dropped the key. Dr. Nupur was still normal upto this time. When Bharti had gone downstairs to pick up the keys, Dr. Nupur had called the mobile No. of Hemraj at 6.01 am. Bharti accordingly came upstairs and opened the latch of the door and walked in. By that time, Dr. Nupur and Dr. Rajesh were found standing in the dining area and opposite the door of Aarushi’s room respectively. Both were weeping and telling maid Bharti “Dekho Hemraj Kya Karke Gaya Hai?”. When maid Bharti looked in Aarushi’s room, she saw her dead body covered with a white bed sheet. Dr. Nupur removed the sheet from her face and showed it to Bharti. On seeing this she became frightened and went out of the residence of Talwar’s to inform the neighbours. By this time one or two neighbours had come to the flat. Dr. Nupur also telephoned her parents, Dr. Durrani and Dr. Dinesh Talwar. The parents of Nupur were the first to reach the residence of Dr. Rajesh Talwar. Polie were informed by the family at around 7.15 am.
12. On receiving information, local police reached the spot and conducted necessary formalities. They were informed by Dr. Talwar that Hemraj had committed the murder and was missing. After necessary formalities, body of Aarushi was sent for postmortem. By this time some friends of Dr. Rajesh Talwar including one Dr. Rajiv Kumar and Dr. Rohit Kochar had reached the residence of Dr. Rajesh Talwar and had stumbled upon some blood stains on the handle of terrace door which was locked. They had also seen some wiped bloody footmarks and wiped blood stains on the upper staircase. Dr. Rajesh Talwar was asked for the keys to the terrace door, but he went inside his residence after having a look at the blood stained door handle. The blood stained marks on the stairs between the flat of Dr. Rajesh Talwar and his terrace were seen by other persons also. Police officers also went and saw the blood stains and directed the IO to get it opened but police failed to open it on 16/05/2008. Dr. Rajesh Talwar had been insisting that the police instead of wasting time in the flat should search for Hemraj.
13. The body of Aarushi was brought back to the residence of Dr. Rajesh Talwar by aroudn 7.30pm. After keeping the body there for about half an hour, the body was taken to the cremation ground in Noida where the last rites of Aarushi were carried out. As sson as the body of Aarushi was taken for cremation, the staff of Dr. Rajesh Talwar and Dr. Nupur Talwar showed undue haste in thoroughly cleaning the floor and walls of Aarushi’s room with soap and water. The blood stained mattress on the bed of Aarushi and other blood stained articles were carried by them to the terrace. On finding the terrace door locked, they asked for the key of the terrace door of the adjacent flat belonging to Shri Puneesh Tandon. The blood stained mattress etc. were thrown on the terrace of Shri Puneesh Tandon and the terrace door was locked.
14. On 17/5/08, Dr. Rajesh Talwar , Dr. Nupur Talwar, Dr. Dinesh Talwar and others went to the cremation ground for collecting the ashes. The ashes were collected and kept in a locker which was rented by Dr. Rajesh Talwar. Dr. Rajesh Talwar and family members then returned home at around 9 am. On reaching home, after around an hour it was decided that Dr. Rajesh Talwar, Dr. Nupur Talwar etc. will go to Haridwar immediately. Dr. Dinesh Talwar stayed back. Dr. Rajesh Talwar, Dr. Nupur Talwar and Shri Satish Talwar, a cousin of Dr. Rajesh Talwar, went to the cremation ground for a second time, collected the ashes kept in the locker and left for Haridwar.
15. Investigation also revealed that Dr. Dinesh Talwar, Dr. Sushil Chaudhary and Shri K.K. Gautam, Retd. DSP were in contact with each other since 16.5.08. Dr. Sushil Chaudhary had contacted Shri K.K. Gaitam on 16/5/08 and told him about the murder of Aarushi. At the time he conveyed the request of Dr. Dinesh Talwar that rape should not be mentioned in the postmortem report.
16. That on 17/5/08 morning, Dr. Sushil Chaudhary telephoned Shri K.K Gatam and insisted that Sh. Gautam should accompany him to the residence of Dr. Rajesh Talwar, where Dr. Dinesh Talwar asked Shri K.K. Gautam, in the bedroom of Dr. Rajesh Talwar, to get the lock of the door of the terrace opened through police. Shri K.K. Gautam went up the stairs to the terrace door and saw blood stains on the stairs and drag marks in front of the terrace door. He telephonically contacted local police officers. After a few minutes, police reached the terrace and asked for the keys to the lock. They were told that the keys were not available. The lock of the door was then broken. As soon as the door was opened, all those present saw that there were blood marks on the roof as if a body as been dragged. A body in advanced stage of putrification was seen lying towards the left side of the roof near the external unit of the air conditioner. The body was covered with a cooler panel taken from the cooler situated on the roof. A double bed cover was draped on the iron grill segregating the portion of the terrace of Dr. Rajesh Talwar from the other side of the roof. Immediately on discovery of body other police officers also reached the spot. Dr. Dinesh Talwar who was present did not identify the body but he did not identify the body. He was then asked to call Dr. Rajesh Talwar for identification of the body. Dr. Dinesh Talwar replied that Dr. Rajesh Talwar had already left for Haridwar and it will be difficult for him to come back as he must have covered a lot of distance. However, within 10-15 minutes, Dr. Rajesh Talwar came to the spot and on seeing the body he also did not identify the body. Later on it was identified by a friend of Hemraj that this was the body of the servant of Dr. Rajesh Talwar named Hemraj who was alleged to have killed Aarushi and run away. Dr. Rajesh Talwar, immediately after that left for Haridwar alongwith Dr. Dinesh Talwar.
17. Investigation relating to post mortem of Aarushi and Hemraj revealed the following facts:
i. A whitish discharge was present inside the vaginal cavity and mouth of cervix of deceased Aarushi.
ii. The hymen of Aarushi was ruptured and was having old tear and was fibriated.
iii. The vaginal orifice of deceased Aarushi was unduly large and the mouth of cervix was visible.
iv. No signs of rape was visible.
v. The whitish discharge present in the private parts of Aarushi was taken and smears sent for Pathological examination. The pathologist reported absence of sperms.
vi. Rigor mortis had set in.
vii. No signs of asphyxia were visible.
viii. There were no signs of urine or any other body fluid on the underwear of pyjama of Aarushi.
ix. Doctor found semi digested food in the stomach of Aarushi.
x. The time of death was between 12 midnight and 1:00 am in the night.
xi. As per doctors who conducted postmortem there were two types of weapons during assault/murder, with one weapon being a heavy blunt weapon and the other being very sharp and light instrument.
xii. The blunt injury was caused first and was sufficient to cause death. The incised wound on the neck was caused later.
xiii. The blunt injury in respect of Aarushi was on the front side of her face on her forehead and on the occipital region.
i. The time of death was between 12 midnight and 1:00 am in the night.
ii. There was use of two types of weapons during assault/murder: with one weapon being a heavy blunt weapon and the other being very sharp and light instrument.
iii. The blunt injury was caused first and was sufficient to cause death. The incised wound on the neck was caused later.
iv. No food was found in the stomach of Hemraj.
v. The blunt injury is on the back side of his head.
vi. The abrasion and contusion on the body of Hemraj indicated anti-mortem dragging.
i. The identical measurement of the lacerated wound by blunt weapon in both the victims shows the use of same weapon to hit both the victims.
ii. As per the statement of doctors who conducted postmortem, the injuries to the neck of both the victims were caused by small and sharp weapon by a surgically trained person in a precise manner. But an expert committee got constituted by earlier had concluded to the cut marks could have been made by a Khukri.
18. During investigation various aspects of the investigation were got clarified and confirmed through Expert opinion.
i. The scene of crime was inspected by an expert from FSI, Gandhinagar. He gave detailed report in which he pointed out that the crime had been cimmitted by someone very close to Aarushi. He has also opined that the body of Hemraj was dragged on the roof with a sheet.
ii. Experts from CFSI have also confirmed that the drag mark on the roof is from the blood soaked body being dragged after being kept in a bedsheet.
iii. The experts have measured the golf clubs and have opined about the dimensions of the striking distance of golf club no. 5 seized from Dr. Rajesh Talwar is identical to the dimensions of the injury found on both the victims.
iv. The opinion of the experts is available to establish that no biological fluid were available on the undergarments and pyjama of Aarushi. The opinion has also established presence of a wet circular mark on the bed sheet below the pelvic area of Aarushi which was not urine. It has also been established that the private parts of Aarushi were extraordinarily dilated when seen during post mortem.
v. DNA expert has confirmed the presence of blood of both the victims on a Ballantine scotch bottle which was seized from the dining table of Dr. Rajesh Talwar.
vi. The expert has confirmed that when Aarushi was assaulted, the door of her bedroom was open.
vii. The doctors who conducted the post mortem have stated the cuts to the neck of both the victims were caused by a small sharp instrument with surgical precision and by a surgically trained person.
viii. The experts opined that blood of Annishi was found from the bed sheet recovered from her bed room. The DNA of Hemraj was found from the blood stained palm print found on the terrace wall and the personal clothing of Hemraj. That DNA of none of the servants was found on any of the exhibits collected from the crime scene.
ix. Finger print of the servants or family members were not found on any of the exhibits collected from the scene of crime.
x. No biological fluid or DNA could be recovered from the golf sticks handed over by Dr. Rajesh Talwar.
xi. Two of the Golf sticks from Golf set handed over by Dr. Rajesh Talwar were cleaner than the other Golf sticks of the set.
xii. Human blood could not be detected on the khukri which belonged to suspect Krishna.
19. Investigation revealed that the scene of crime in the room of Aarushi as well as on the roof where the body of Hemraj was found was heavily dressed. The important facts which show dressing of the scene of crime are reflected in the photographs of the scene of crime. These includes:-
i. The body of Aarushi was lying undisturbed on her bed inspite of use of violent force in the assault.
ii. The toys kept on the surface of the bed and back side of the bed are undisturbed.
iii. The body was covered with a blood drenched white sheet.
iv. The bed sheet of Aarushi’s bed does not show any disturbance or signs of use of violence/force.
v. The string of pyjama of Aarushi us visible in untied condition.
vi. The lower garments of Aarushi appear to be pulled up/down. Her backside cleavage is visible.
vii. A circular marks of wetness is visible below the pelvic area of the body of Aarushi of Aarushi on the bed sheet. However, the pyjamas worn by Aarushi do not have any signs of wetness.
viii. The school bag of Aarushi is seen lying near her body without any blood on it.
ix. The pink coloured pillow kept on the back of the back of the bed falls within the blood pattern area but there is no blood droplets on it.
x. Dragging marks of body of Hemraj towards the outdoor unit of AC. The quantity of blood near the AC is more than the quantity of blood at the spot from where the mark of dragging begins.
xi. The neck of Aarushi was slit later on.
xii. Position of door key of Aarushi’s room was found unexplained by the parents who were custodian of the key.
xiii. The body of Hemraj was dragged to the corner on the roof.
xiv. The body of Hemraj was covered by a panel of a cooler.
xv. The grill on the roof was covered by a double bed cover.
xvi. The door to the roof was locked for the first time in the night of the incident from the staircase side.
xvii. Blood stained drag marks were seen on the stair case leading from the flat of Dr. Rajesh Talwar to the terrace. Some of the blood stained marks were wiped with a cloth.
xviii. Aarushi’s room was cleaned and washed immediately after the body was taken for cremation.
xix. An impression was given that the outer door of Dr. Talwar’s flat was locked from outside which actually was not so.
xx. The blood of the deceased has drained out from the cut in the neck. There is no “arterial spurting.”
xxi. The blood on the pillow of deceased Aarushi shows two blood patterns, one is draining of blood and another is splashed of droplets.
xxi. The injury above the left eyebrow shows a U/V-shaped injury which is horizontal to the body.
20. Investigation with reference to the murder weapon revealed that Dr. Rajesh Talwar was a member of Golf Club, NOIDA. He has been regularly practicing golf using twi golf sticks were kept in his Santro Car. Some time before the incident, the Santro car of Dr. Rajesh Talwar was to be given for servicing. At that time, the driver had taken out both the Golf sticks and had kept them in the room of Hemraj. In the photographs of room of Hemraj, taken by CFSL on 01.06.08, only one golf stick is visible and the other one was found missing. Dr. Rajesh Talwar was unable to explain the missing golf stick while in police custody remand with CBI.
21. During investigation, on being asked, Dr. Rajesh Talwar handed over the complete golf set comprising of 03 wooden clubs (Nos. 1, 3 & 5). 07 iron clubs (Nos. 3 to 9), 01 iron club marked “P” and 01 iron putter to CBI. The golf set taken over from Rajesh Talwar was sent to experts. No body fluid or blood could be detected on the golf sticks. The schematic diagram of the golf sticks showing their dimensions and dimensions of the striking surfaces were provided to CFSL. The dimensions of the striking surfacing was provided to CFSL. The dimensions of the striking surface of the golf club bearing No. 5 were identical to the dimensions of the injury on the heads of victim Aarushi and Hemraj. The expert also pointed out that Golf sticks bearing No. 3 & 5 appeared to have been thoroughly cleaned so much so that they were visibly distinct from the other golf sticks of the set. The golf set was subjected to Test Identification Parade by driver of Dr. Rajesh Talwar i.e Shri Umesh in presence of independent witness. Shri Umesh identified Golf stick No. 4 and 5 as the golf sticks which were kept by him in the room of Hemraj. On being asked to reconcile the earlier missing golf stick with production of complete golf set, Dr. Rajesh Talwar informed that his cousin Ajay Chadda and his wife Dr. Nupur had found one golf stick in the loft of their residence when the loft was being cleaned around a year after the incident. Shri Ahay Chadda, confirmed that he and Dr. Nupur Talwar had found one Golf stick in the loft of the residence of Dr. Talwar near the room of Aarushi, that the golf stick had a steel head, that as soon as the golf stick was found in the loft, Dr. Nupur Talwar and Shri Ajay Chadda had seen this golf stick to see whether any blood was on the golf stick. This “recovery” of the golf stick, from the loft, was not intimated by either the Talwar or Shri Ajay Chadda to anyone including CBI for more than a year.
22. During investigation Dr. Rajesh Talwar, Dr. Nupur Talwar, Dr. Dinesh Talwar, Dr. Sushil Choudhary, Dr. Ritcha Saxena, suspect servants namely, Krishna, Raj Kumar & Vijay Mandal were subjected to various scientific tests including Lie Detection Test, Brain Fingerprinting Test and Narco Analysis Tests. The test results for all the suspects were found to be inconclusive.
23. During investigation CDR details of various mobile phones and internet activity of Dr. Rajesh Talwar were analyzed with the help of experts. The major points which emerged from this analysis are:-
i. Dr. Rajesh Talwar used the internet during the night of the incident and he was active on internet till around 12.00 midnight. On the night of 15/15.5.2008 the internet router remained continuously active with small gaps, with last activity at 3.43 a.m. when the router was ultimately switched off. After that the router has been switched on at 6.01 a.m. when maid Bharati reached the residence of Dr. Talwar and Dr. Nupur Talwar made a call on the mobile phone of Hemraj.
ii. The opinion of the internet service provider as well as technical expert from “CERT-IN” confirm that is switching on/switching off with long gap can only be done by i) physically or ii) Due to power cut. As per electric supply department, there was no power cut in the area on that particular night. However, the details of internet activity during day-time on 16/05/2008 shows that the router was switched on and off on a number of occasion with long gaps, even when the police and visitors were in the apartment. The opinion of experts is unable to explain this activity of router on 16th satisfactorily. Unexplained router activity on 16th makes this piece of evidence not fully reliable.
iii. Aarushi used to remain busy on her mobile till well after midnight and sometimes upto 1.00 a.m. On the night of incident, her mobile phone was used last at 21.10.25 hrs. and it was switched off after that. Some of the friends of Aarushi had tried to contact her on her mobile phone but it was found switched off. One of her friends Anmol had even tried to contact her on the landline number at around 12.00 midnight but there was no response. This mobile phone went missing immediately after the murder. The phone could not be traced till 12.09.2009. Investigation revealed that Aarushi’s phone was found by housemaid Kusum around 15 to 20 days after the incident. The phone was found in a ‘kacha’ route which used by people living in the Sadarpur area of NOIDA. The phone was sent to CFSL, Hyderabad which confirmed that the IMEI number of the recovered phone and the IMEI number of Aarushi’s phone were identical. However, the MMC card of the phone as well as the memory of the phone had been cleaned so that no data (SMS, MMS, Phone book etc.) relating to Aarushi was available on the mobile phone.
iv. The call details of Hemraj do not show any interaction with any of the three suspect servants on 15.5.2008. On 16.5.2008 at 06.00.01 AM a call has been received for two seconds. The call originated from the residential telephone number of Dr. Rajesh Talwar(120-4316388). As per the tower location, this mobile phone of Hemraj was located at that time in the area which includes the residence of Dr. Rajesh Talwar.
v. On 15.5.2008 Dr. Rajesh Talwar has returned to his home at around 9.30 PM. On this date, the last activity on this phone is at 23.01 hrs and the tower location shows that he was at his residence. Next day, i.e. on 16.5.2008, the first activity is at 6.19 AM and as per tower location the phone is in the residence of Dr. Rajesh Talwar.
vi. On 15.5.2008, there is no activity on the mobile phone of Dr. Nupur Talwar after 19.40.07 hrs. At that time, the tower location indicates that she was at her residence. Her phone remained inactive till 18.5.2008 at 01.07.40 hrs.
vii. The CDR activity of Dr. Dinesh Talwar reveals his close interaction with Dr. Sushil Choudhary and the loop of calls between Dr. Dinesh Talwar, Dr, Sushil Choudhary and Shri K.K Gautam.
24. The CBI during its investigations looked into three possible angles relating to the crime in detail:
i) Involvement of intruders, other than servants
ii) Involvements of servants, Krishna, Rajkumar & Vijay Mandal.
iii) Involvement of parents
i) Involvement of intruders.
The possibility of involvement of intruders other than the servants was ruled out during earlier phase of investigation by UP police. This was further strengthened by various circumstances showing that there was no possibility of involvement of an outsider in this crime. Some of the circumstances are:-
a. No evidence has come forth which to suggest forcible entry from the outside.
b. No evidence has come forth about motive on the part of any outsider.
c. No contact was made by any outsider with either Hemraj or Aarushi’s parents.
d. There is nothing to suggest that the outer most door has been latched/locked.
e. Evidence has come forth that only the family members and Hemraj were last seen the house before the crime and only parents were first seen after the crime.
f. Aarushi’s door cannot be opened by an outsider without a key.
g. The guard of the colony examined has stated that no outsider was seen either going into the house of Talwar’s or coming out from their house.
h. No intruder would bother to dress of scene of crime.
i. No intruder would hide the body of the victim i.e. Hemraj.
j. An intruder will not put a white bed sheet over the dead body of Aarushi.
k. No intruder will lock the terrace door.
l. An intruder is unlikely to take liquor inside the flat after committing a double murder when they know that parents are sleeping in the next room.
ii) Involvement of servants
During investigation it was revealed that Krishna was working as a helper/assistant to Dr. Rajesh Talwar in his NOIDA clinic. Raj Kumar was domestic servant of Dr. Durrani, a close friend of Dr. Rajesh Talwar and used to live in a garage near the flat of Dr. Rajesh Talwar. During investigation it was revealed that Krishna was scolded by Dr. Rajesh Talwar for making dental cast incorrectly. Krishna was very agitated on this. It was felt that Krishna alongwith his other Nepali friends might have committed the crime to take revenge against Dr. Rajesh Talwar. Krishna and Raj Kumar were Nepalis known to Hemraj and had access to the home of Dr. Rajesh Talwar, their possible role in the crime was investigated.
During the initial investigation by CBI suspect servants namely, Krishna, Rajkumar and Vijay Mandal were arrested and intensive investigation was carried out regarding their possible involvement. However, it was conclusively established that the servants could not have committed the crime for the following reasons:
i. There is no evidence against the servants except the Narco Test which was not reliable.
ii. Ther is no evidence that Krishna was woken up in the morning after the crime by the Police and Landlord K.N. Johri when he was sound asleep in the garage alongwith his family, The garage belong to Shri K.N.Johri.
iii. There is evidence that family members of Krishna were witness to his presence at this house during the night.
iv. There was no interaction on telephone between any of the servants on that day or physical meeting between them.
v. Hemraj was a teetotaller.
vi. Servants would not have the guts to assemble at the house of Dr. Talwar when doth the doctors were present in the house.
vii. Presence of Raj Kumar has been explained upto 12.30 AM on that night. He had gone to the railway station New Delhi alongwith his employer Dr. Praful Durrani to fetch Dr. Anita Durrani. They had reached home at around 11.30 when Raj Kumar had prepared a meal for Dr. Anita Durrani who took the food after 12.00 in the night due to her fast. They went to sleep at around 12.30 in the night.
viii. Minimum time to reach Aarushi’s house by bycycle is 20 minutes whereas the time of death is between 12.00 to 1.00 AM. SO, it is impossible for him to have reached the scene of crime within the estimated time of assault.
ix. The house of Dr. Durrani was locked from inside by Dr. Durrani himself and it was difficult for Raj Kumar to have got out.
x. The Watchmen manning the gate of the Society at both the places did not see any movement of Rajkumar on that night.
xi. There were no phone calls between Rak Kumar and any of the other three servants, hence there was no prior conspiracy.
xii. Rajkumar was not known to Vijay Mandal and had very little interaction with Krishna.
xiii. Rajkumar did not run away when Krishna was arrested even though he had the opportunity to do so.
xiv. Vijay Mandal had no mobile to communicate with the others.
xv. Name of Vijay Mandal did not figure in the Narco Test.
xvi. The Khukri in possession of Krishna was blunt edged and had no traces of human blood or fingerprints.
xvii. Narco report of Krishna and Raj Kumar had mentioned that the mobile phone of Aarushi was sent to Nepal whereas the mobile phone of Hemraj was destroyed. However, during investigation these revelations were found to be incorrect since the mobile phone of Aarushi was recovered from NOIDA and the mobile phone of Hemraj was found active within the territory of Punjab.
xviii. The custodial interrogation of all the three suspects did not reveal any important discrepancies.
iii) Involvement of Parents (Dr. Rajesh Talwar & Dr. Nupur Talwar)
The UP Police during their investigation had suspected Dr. Rajesh Talwar to have committed the crime due to grave & sudden provocation on finding his daughter in a compromising position with Hemraj. Based on the investigation conducted by them, UP Police had arrested Dr. Rajesh Talwarand taken him to Police remand. The investigation by CBI revealed certain peculiar circumstances which point towards involvement of the parents in the crime. Some of the important facts and circumstances are as below:
i) During the pre-test interview at FSI, Gandhinagar, Dr. Rajesh Talwar and Dr. Nupur Talwar have stated that they used to lock the bedroom of Aarushi during the night. The door of Aarushi had a lock which could be opened from the inside without a key but once it was shut it cannot be opened from the outside without a key [illegible text] similar to the locks in hotel rooms). The key to this room used to be kept under the pillow of Dr. Nupur Talwar in their bed room. After the incident the keys to Aarushi’s room were found in the lobby near the drawing room 12.00 noon on 16-05-2008. According to Dr. Rajesh Talwar and Dr. Nupur Talwar, they had found the door to the bed room of Aarushi unlocked and slightly open in the morning of 16.5.2008. They could not explain as to whether they had locked the room of Aarushi in the night of 15.5.2008, and why the key was not traceable in the morning of 16.5.2008. The room of Aarushi therefore, could have been opened only either by Aarushi herself from inside or by the parents of Aarushi from outside by using the keys.
ii) The scene of crime was heavily dressed up which could only have been done by the parents. The major dressing up of SOC was revealed as follows:
* the body of Aarushi was found covered with a white bed sheet.
* The bed linen of Aarushi was found undisturbed.
* Evidence of postmortem cleaning of the private parts of Aarushi
* The body of Hemraj was dragged to a corner and covered by a panel of cooler.
* Locking the door to the staircase for the first time on the night og 15/16.05.2008.
* Existence of blood stains/drag marks and wiped blood stains on the staircase.
* Presence of a scotch bottle without glasses on the dining table of Dr. Rajesh Talwar with blood of both the victims on it indicates the involvement of inmates as it was unlikely that an intruder would return to the flat to take liquor after committing two murders.
* The surgical cuts on the necks of both victims was the work of professional trained experts. This could only be the parents.
* The entire data on Aarushi’s mobile was deleted. Normal criminal would have no need to do so.
iii) When the Police arrived at the SOC on morning 16.5.2008 they were immediately diverted by parents and sent to search for Hemraj.
iv) Dr. Rajesh Talwar ingored the request for providing the keys to open the lock to the terrace even when blood stains were found on the door.
v) Refused to identify the dead body of Hemraj when it was found on the terrace.
vi) Request for non-mention of rape in P.M. proceedings.
vii) Statement of Shri K.K. Gautam indicate the detection of dead body of Hemraj was not a mere coincidence.
viii) Golf stick which was found missing earlier was later detected by the Talwars themselves but this was not intimated to anybody for almost a year.
ix) The facts and circumstances revealed that the murder was caused by a golf stick which indicates that the assault was initiated [illegible text] a grave and sudden provocation.
x) Just before the postmortem was to begin, Dr. Dinesh Talwar made Dr. Sunil Dohre to talk to some one on phone under the impression that he was talking to Dr. Dogra, Head of Forensics, AIIMS< New Delhi which shows a clear attempt to influence the doctor during the postmortem.
25. The findings of the investigation reveal a number of circumstances that indicate the involvement of the parents in the crime and the cover up. However there are a number of critical and serious gaps in the circumstances which make it difficult to string together the sequence of events and motive behind the gruesome murder.
The investigating team was handicapped by the inability of the first responders to examine the scene of crime properly and collect all possible available evidences which could be available only to the first responder.
Despite best efforts by investigating team, some of the major shortcomings in the evidence are:-
i. No blood of Hemraj was found on the bed sheet and pillow of Aasushi. There is no evidence to prove that Hemraj was killed in the room of Aarushi.
ii. Dragging mark on the steps only indicate that murder has taken place somewhere other than the terrace.
iii. On the clothes of Dr. Rajesh Talwar, only the blood of Aarushi was found but there was no trace of blood of Hemraj.
iv. The clothes that Dr. Nupur Talwar was wearing in the photograph taken by Aarushi in the night of the incident were seized by CBI but no blood was found during forensic examination.
v. Murder weapons were not recovered immediately after the offence. One of the murder weapon i.e. sharp edged instrument could not be recovered till date and expert could not find any blood stain or DNA of victims from gold stick to directly link it to the crime.
vi. There is no evidence to explain the finger prints on the scotch bottle (which were found along with blood stains of both the victims on the bottle). As per police diary, it was taken into possession on 16th morning itself. In spite of best efforts, the fingerprint could not be identified.
vii. The guards of the colony are mobile during night and at the entrance they do not make an entry. Therefore, their statements regarding movement of persons may not be foolproof.
viii. Scientific tests on Dr. Rajesh Talwar and Dr. Nupur Talwar have not conclusively indicated their involvement in the crime.
ix. The exact sequence of events between (in the intervening night of 15-16/05/2008) 00.08 mid night to 6.00 AM in the morning is not clear. No evidence has emerged to show the clear role of Dr. Rajesh Talwar and Dr. Nupur Talwar, individually, in the commission of crime.
x. A board of experts constituted during earlier investigation team has given an opinion that the possibility of the neck being cut by a khukri cannot be ruled out although doctors who have conducted postmortem have said that cut was done by surgically trained person with a small surgical instrument.
xi. There is no evidence to explain the presence of Hemraj’s mobile in Punjab after murder.
xii. The offence has occurred in an enclosed flat hence no eye witnesses are available.
xiii. The blood soaked clothes of the offenders, clothes used to clean the blood from the flat and stair case, the sheet on which Hemraj was carried and dragged on the roof, the bed cover used to cover the view from the steel iron grill on the roof are not available and hence could not be recovered.
26. The investigation revealed several suspicious actions by the parents [illegible text] occurrence, but the circumstantial evidence collected during investigation has critical and substantial gaps. There is absence of a clear cut motive and incomplete understanding of the sequence of events and non-recovery of one weapon of offence and their link to either the servants or the parents.
In view of the aforesaid shortcomings in the evidence, it is felt that sufficient evidence is not available to prove the offence U/s 302/201 IPC against accused Dr. Rajesh Talwar beyond reasonable doubt. It is, therefore prayed that the case may be allowed to be closed due to insufficient evidence.
Addl. Supdt. of Police,
CBI, SC.II, New Delhi
Published Date: Oct 12, 2017 03:58 pm | Updated Date: Oct 12, 2017 04:02 pm