In Aarushi-Hemraj double murder case, the defence lawyers refuted CBI theory that parents killed their daughter and the servant in sudden provocation. Refuting it, the defence lawyer Satyketu Singh submitted that the prosecution, which has designed the story of murder by parents is on the basis of the statement made by Dr Mahendra Singh Dahiya a Gandhi Nagar-based CFSl scientist, is full of holes.
Firstly, Dr Dahiya never visited the crime spot. He made the statement on the basis of the photographs and the statements of Dr Sunil Dohre and Dr Naresh Raj submitted to him. Dr Dohre and Dr Naresh Raj in their five statements during investigation never mentioned that Hemraj’s blood was found on Aarushi’s pillow, but in the sixth statement from the two doctors was in itself a contradiction with Dr BK Mahapatra’s report, which stated that no blood and other DNA evidence was found of Hemraj in Aarushi’s room. Such reports based on photographs are not admissible in the Evidence Act.
Secondly Dr Dohre in his five statements had mentioned no abnormality was found in the vagina of the deceased but in his sixth statement he mentioned her intimate area was dilated. Dr Jl Kaul has mentioned in his closure report that no evidence — blood and DNA — were found in Aarushi’s room. So the CBI story of killing the daughter by parents is not sustainable. The defence concluded its defence arguments in two hours from 2.00 pm to 4.00 pm.