Why in news?
- Allahabad High Court recently acquitted the Talwar couple in the murder of their daughter Aarushi.
- The case has highlighted the need for a sober analysis of our investigative set-up as a whole.
How did the case evolve?
- 13 year old Aarushi (daughter of the Talwars) and their domestic help Hemraj were murdered in their Noida home in 2008.
- The Sessions court had convicted the Talwar couple in 2013 for double murder and sentenced them to life imprisonment.
- Allahabad High Court has now overturned the conviction and has given Talwars - the benefit of doubt.
- In its order, the High Court severely censored the Sessions judgment for having drafted a story to implicate the couple.
- The trial court is said to have proceeded with what were apparently the ‘most appropriate’ assumptions to arrive at its conclusions.
What are larger implications of various Judicial Directives?
- Pressure - CBI initially wanted a closure due to lack of evidence.
- But it was overruled by a trial judge, who pressed for further investigation.
- Investigators cannot be expected to find all the hidden facts in a crime and gaps will always remain.
- Rather, only a dishonest suppression of facts deserves scrutiny.
- Hence, the judiciary’s tendency to exert enormous pressure on investigating agencies is certainly extra-legal.
- In this case, the wrongful conviction of Talwars after declaring a lack of evidence is a direct consequence of this.
- Arrests - Also, the decision of arresting an accused must be the discretion of the investigating officer and not the courts.
- Court intervention is called for only when investigation is proven to be on a dishonest path.
- Junior courts – While, the trial court has indeed delivered an improper judgement in this case, the tone of the current High Court verdict is very aggressive in its criticism.
- This might create a fear psychosis among lower court judges.
- They might want to play it safe in future cases – thereby delaying judgments or blunting the deserved severity of verdicts.
What are problems with investigative policing?
- Some blatant mistakes were committed by the U.P. Police which initially investigated the crime.
- The most serious of these was the failure to protect the scene of crime, and allowing free access to public.
- Investigation work requires thorough knowledge of procedural law and familiarity with advances in technology.
- Direct recruitment to crime branches for investigative training is not possible as grounding in “law and order” maintainance is a pre-requisite.
- Unfortunately, policemen once posted in law and order are excessively reluctant to leave it due to the lure of money & power.
What are the takeaways for the CBI?
- Heightened media glare and pressure forced the constitution of multiple teams one after the other for investigating the crime.
- Hence, investigations need to be insulated from media sensationalism & political pressures for better working.
- While the CBI did come out with a laborious report, the High Court has quashed the report rooted on seemingly correct facts.
- This calls for a rational reflection, as the reputation of the organisation is under question.
- Ultimately, the fact that the case remains unsolved and that the Talwars had already suffered 4 years in jail is a blot it itself.
Source: The Hindu
