In their plea, defence lawyer Satyaketu Singh submitted that five weapons – hammer, knife, khukri, golf stick and surgical scalpel – had surfaced during investigation by the two investigation agencies – the Uttar Pradesh Police and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
Dismissing the Uttar Pradesh Police theory of hammer and knife being used for killing the duo, the CBI, for the first time in October 2009, said the killers used golf sticks and surgical scalpel to commit the murders.
Contradicting the CBI theory, Satyaketu said when the entire golf club was handed over to investigation officer Rachhpal Singh in October 2009 in the Talwars’ clinic and the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL) Delhi sealed the bag containing the golf club the same year after completing the test, how did the CBI in 2010 claim that Talwars’ driver Umesh Kumar identified two sticks – numbers 3 and 5 – of the total stock. Did they tamper with the CFSL seal, he asked.
Umesh contradicted the CBI claim that the probe agency presented only two sticks before him. He added he had little knowledge about golf sticks. He only agreed with the CBI that the sticks were extra clean.
Contrary to the CBI claim about stick numbers 3 and 5, the CFSL, Delhi contradicted the CBI theory and claimed stick numbers 3 and 6 were extra clean. The CFSL claim contradicted the CBI on stick number 5.
Satyaketu Singh raised the question on the legality of the stick identification. “As per set rules, identification should be conducted in the presence of a magistrate while in this case, the investigation officer did it without completing legal requirements, hence it has no legal value,” he said.
After three hours of defence arguments for the third day from 1.00 p.m. to 4.00 p.m., the CBI judge adjourned the court for Oct 30, to record further arguments of the defence.
Aarushi, 14, was found murdered at her parents’ Noida residence May 16, 2008. Next day, Hemraj’s body was found on the house terrace.