|Rediff India Abroad Home | All the sections|
Aarushi case: Talwar's bail plea rejected
June 26, 2008 18:48 IST
Rajesh Talwar, an accused in the Noida double murder case, will continue to remain in jail as a sessions court on Thursday rejected his bail application after the CBI claimed that it had reasonable grounds to suspect his involvement.
Rejecting the bail application, District and Sessions Judge Narender Kumar Jain said Talwar would continue to be in the judicial custody. He was arrested on May 23 by the Noida police for allegedly murdering his 14-year-old daughter Aarushi and domestic help Hemraj.
The case was later transferred to the CBI, which carried out a custodial interrogation of Talwar, a dentist by profession.
Arguing on behalf of Talwar, his counsel Satish Tamta stated before the court that nothing incriminating was found against his client by the CBI, which continued to remain inconsistent about his involvement in the case.
Countering the bail application, CBI counsel A K Saini, while maintaining it continued to be a blind murder case, contended that there was reasonable ground to believe that Talwar was involved in the crime.
Earlier, Talwar's counsel said there is no evidence with the CBI against him till date, except for a statement taken by the CBI officials under 161 Criminal Procedure Code whereby he would be helping the probe agency in finding out the evidence in the crime.
Tamta pointed out that the statement given before the investigators was not admissible in law.
While making it clear that Talwar would continue to cooperate in the case, the defence lawyer even highlighted the Talwar family's service in the field of medicine and said he was from an illustrious family and would work along with the CBI in finding out the culprit besides joining any further scientific tests suggested by the probe agency.
Saini stated before the court that it was mentioned in the FIR that Talwar, on being asked about Hemraj, had said, "Hemraj mera naukar tha." (he was my servant).
"In his sub-conscious mind he (Talwar) knew that Hemraj was not alive," Saini contended, prompting Tamta to raise objection that he was playing with the words.
The CBI prosecutor questioned as to how it was possible that he or his wife could not have heard the screams of their daughter when they were just five feet away from the scene of crime.
The CBI counsel also informed the court that holding Krishna as an accused did not mean that Talwar had moved out of the realm of suspicion in the case.
"There is reasonable ground to believe that he is involved in the crime. The conspiracy angle is yet to be probed," the counsel said.
Countering the defence lawyer's argument about the family background of Talwar, Saini said standing of a person cannot be a sufficient ground to allow him get bail and added that the double murder case continued to be blind and the agency should be given time to file chargesheet.
He also said Talwar had refused to identify the body of Hemraj to which the defence counsel intervened and said his client was under shock and that he had stated that clothes on the body gave an impression that it was that of Hemraj.
Since the body was disfigured, Talwar had asked the police to get his son-in-law from the neighbouring locality to identify him, Tamta contended.