Connect with us


Why The Court Didn’t Believe Parents Of Aarushi?



Why The Court Didn't Believe Parents Of Aarushi?

Why The Court Didn’t Believe Parents Of Aarushi?

New Delhi: In detailed, point by point, explanation on all the oral and documentary evidence given by prosecution, the judge in the now infamous Aarushi murder case, listed all the enlisted circumstances that persuaded him to issue the guilty verdict that he described as “irresistible and impeccable’. The following are the areas in the defense argument that the judge found problematic, as enumerated in a report appearing India’s national newspaper, The Times Of India.

 On night of May 15/16, 2008, both accused last seen with both deceased in Flat No. L-32, Jalvayu Vihar, around 9.30pm by Umesh Sharma, driver of Dr Rajesh Talwar.

On morning of May 16, around 6am, Aarushi found murdered in her bedroom which was adjacent to bedroom of accused and there was only one partition wall between the two bedrooms.

Body of Hemraj found lying in pool of blood on terrace of flat on May 17 and door of terrace found locked from inside.

Close proximity between the time when both accused and deceased persons last seen together alive and when deceased murdered in the intervening night of May 15/16, 2008. The gap so small that possibility of any other person(s) other than the accused being behind crime impossible.

Door of Aarushi’s bedroom fitted with automatic click-shut lock. Mahesh Kumar Mishra, then SP (City), Noida, said Dr Talwar told him on morning of May 16 that he had gone to sleep with the key at 11.30pm the previous night, after locking the door of Aarushi’s bedroom from outside. Accused admitted door could be opened either with key from outside or without key from inside. How was door opened? No explanation by accused.

Internet active on night of murders, suggesting at least one accused awake.

Nothing to show that outsider(s) came to house that night after

No disruption of power supply that night.

No one seen loitering near the flat in suspicious circumstances that night.

No evidence of forcible entry by any outsider into the flat that night.

No evidence of any larcenous act in the flat On May 16 morning when maid (Bharti Mandal) came to flat for cleaning. Ruse by Nupur Talwar that door might have been locked from outside by Hemraj, though it was not locked or latched from outside.

Bharti nowhere claimed that when she came inside, both accused were weeping.

From Bharti’s testimony, it’s clear that when she reached the flat and spoke to Nupur, she didn’t complain about the murder of her daughter and rather told her deliberately that Hemraj might have gone to fetch milk from Mother Dairy booth after locking the wooden door from outside.

Clothes of both accused not found soaked with blood.

Highly unnatural that parents of deceased Aarushi didn’t cling to her body or hug it.

No outsider would have dared to take Hemraj to terrace in severely injured condition and thereafter search for a lock to be put on the door of terrace.

Not possible that outsider(s) after committing the murders will muster courage to take Scotch whisky knowing that the parents were in a nearby room.Top priority would be to run away.

No outsider will bother to take body of Hemraj to terrace. One person cannot take the body to terrace anyway.

Door of terrace was never locked earlier but found locked on May 16 morning. The accused didn’t give key of lock to police despite being asked for it.

Accused said that about 8-10 days before murders, some painting work had started in complex and labourers used to take water from the tank on terrace. Hence, Hemraj started locking it and keeping the key with himself. If it was so, it won’t be easy for an outsider to find key.

If an outsider(s) had indeed committed the crime and gone out of the flat, the outermost mesh door or middle mesh door must have been found latched from outside.

Motive of commission of crime established.

Not possible for an outsider to dress up crime scene after commission of crime.

Golf club no 5 thrown into the loft after commission of crime and the same produced after many months by Dr Talwar.

Pattern of head and neck injuries of both accused almost similar in nature and can be caused by golf club and scalpel, respectively

Dr Talwar was a member of Golf Club, Noida, and golf clubs were produced by him before CBI. Scalpel is used by dentists and both accused are dentists.


Pakistani Anti-graft body wants travel ban on Nawaz Sharif, kin



Nawaz sharif

Pakistan’s anti-corruption watchdog has asked authorities to place ousted premier Nawaz Sharif, his daughter and son-in-law on the Exit Control List to prevent them from leaving the country.

The National Accountability Bureau (NAB) sent a formal request to the ministry of interior. The interior ministry officials confirmed that the NAB wrote that names of Sharif, his daughter Maryam Nawaz and son-in-law Capt (retd) Muhammad Safdar should be put on the Exit Control List (ECL), which listed individuals not allowed to leave Pakistan.

The NAB argued that as the trial of the three nears its conclusion, it is feared that they would leave the country.

Earlier, a similar request to place name of finance minister Ishaq Dar on ECL was not accepted, allowing him to go to London and never return.

Sharif, 68, and his family this week filed an application with the accountability court seeking a fortnight’s exemption from personal appearance from February 19 onwards to let them go to London to see Sharif’s ailing wife. Three cases were filed against Sharif and his family last year, including Avenfield properties, Azizia & Hill Metal Establishment, and Flagship Investments.

Maryam and Safdar are accused only in Avenfield properties case. The NAB had filed two supplementary references against Sharif, his sons Hasan and Hussain regarding Al-Azizia Steel Mills & Hill Metal Establishment and Flagship Investment cases.

Continue Reading


Pakistan “breaches obligations’ on nuclear arms reduction, UN court told




The Hague: Pakistan is violating its “obligations” to the international community by failing to reduce its nuclear arsenal, the Marshall Islands told the UN’s highest court on Tuesday.

The small Pacific Island nation is this week launching three unusual cases against India, Pakistan and Britain before the International Court of Justice.

Majuro wants to put a new spotlight on the global nuclear threat, its lawyers said yesterday, by using its own experience with massive US-led nuclear tests in the 1940s and 1950s.

“Pakistan is in breach of its obligations owed to the international community as a whole,” when it comes to reducing its nuclear stockpile, said Nicholas Grief, one of the island nation’s lawyers.

Islamabad and its nuclear-armed neighbour India “continue to engage in a quantitative build-up and a qualitative improvement” of their atomic stockpiles, added Tony deBrum, a Marshallese government minister.

DeBrum warned that even a “limited nuclear war” involving the two countries would “threaten the existence” of his island nation people.

Pakistan and India have fought three wars since independence from Britain in 1947, two of them over the disputed Himalayan territory of Kashmir.

In 1998, the rival neighbours both demonstrated nuclear weapons capability.

The ICJ’s judges are holding hearings for the next week and a half to decide whether it is competent to hear the lawsuits brought against India and Pakistan — neither of which have signed the 1968 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

A third hearing against Britain — which has signed the NPT — scheduled to start on Wednesday will be devoted to “preliminary objections” raised by London.

The Marshalls initially sought to bring a case against nine countries it said possessed nuclear arms: Britain, China, France, India, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia and the United States.
Israel has never admitted to having nuclear weapons.

But the Hague-based ICJ, set up in 1945 to rule in disputes between states, has only admitted three cases against Britain, India and Pakistan, because they have accepted the ICJ’s compulsory jurisdiction.

Pakistan’s lawyers did not attend Tuesday’s hearings.

It did however file a counter-claim against Majuro’s allegations saying “the court has no jurisdiction to deal with the application” and insisting that the case is “not admissible”, said ICJ President Ronny Abraham.

Continue Reading


Bangladesh to drop Islam as official religion following attacks on Hindus



Bangladesh to drop Islam as official religion following attacks on Hindus

New Delhi: Bangladesh is likely to drop Islam as its official religion following a series of attacks on people from other faiths in the country. The country’s Supreme Court is hearing a plea challenging the status of the official religion of the country to Islam.

Bangladesh, which was declared a secular country after its formation in 1971, was declared an Islamic country following a constitutional amendment in 1988.

According to a report in the Daily Mail, the plea has challenged the declaration of Islam as the national religion of the country.

The move is being supported by leaders from the minority communities like Hindus, Christians and Muslim minority Shiites.

Bangladesh has 90 per cent of Muslims, 8 per cent Hindus and remaining constitutes Christians and Muslim minority Shiites.

In last month, a Hindu priest was hacked to death following an attack on a temple in Panchgarh district. Two others were seriously injured in the attack. There have been several lethal attacks on writers and bloggers.

According to a report in the Independent, Islamist groups Jumatul Mujahedeen Bangladesh and Ansarullah Bangla Team are believed to have carried out at least seven attacks on foreign and minority people in Bangladesh in the past year.




Continue Reading

Follow us on Twitter


Skip to toolbar