While sealing the fate of the dentist couple Rajesh and Nupur Talwar, the Special CBI Judge S lal solely relied on circumstantial evidences. Awarding life imprisonment to the couple, the judge noted in the judgement that “of course, there is no direct evidence in this case, it is clear that the prosecution has placed a clinching wealth of circumstances from which the guilt of both the accused has been made out.”
The court reached the conclusion while convicting them in the double murder as it was satisfied with the evidence as tendered by the prosecution in form of oral and documentary evidence. “This court reaches to the irresistible and impeccable conclusion that only the accused persons are responsible for committing this ghastly crime,” judge S lal observed in the 208- page judgement.
The admitted the contention raised by the CBI that no one except Talwars and Hemraj was present or visited the crime scene at that time. “The possibility of any person other than the accused being the authors of the crime becomes impossible. There is nothing to show that an outsider came inside the house,” he also stated.
The court also found similarities in the pattern of head and neck injuries and noted that that can be caused by golf club and scalpel respectively. It stated that it shows the complicity of Talwars. “The scalpel is used by the dentists and both the accused are dentists by profession,” the judge said.
Another circumstantial evidence outlined by the judge said, “It was not possible that after the commission of the crime an outsider will dress-up the crime scene. The clothes of the accused were not found soaked with the blood. It is highly unnatural that parents of deceased Aarushi will not cling to or hug her on seeing her murdered.”
While holding Talwars guilty, the court also appreciated the statement given by the house maid of the Talwars, Bharti Mandal as evidence. “Keeping in view the entire facts and circumstances, I am of the view that this case is not a fit case for inflicting death penalty under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and therefore it appears appropriate and just to sentence the accused to rigorous imprisonment for life,” the order also said.
At the end while departing with the verdict, the special CBI judge said that courts must be prepared to answer new challenges. “The contagion of lawlessness would undermine social order and lay it in ruins. Protection of society and stamping out criminal proclivity must be the object of law which must be achieved by imposing appropriate sentence. Therefore, laws as a corner stone of the edifice of ‘order’ should meet the challenges confronting the society. In operating the sentencing system, law should adopt the corrective machinery or the deterrence based on factual matrix.”