The Central Bureau of Investigation, in its final report submitted before the Ghaziabad special court in December 2010, had concluded that there were a number of critical and serious gaps in the circumstances which made it difficult to string together the sequence of events and motive behind the murders. The agency had blamed the Uttar Pradesh Police for several lapses.
“The investigating team was handicapped by the inability of the first responders (Uttar Pradesh Police) to examine the scene of crime properly and collect all possible available evidence which could be available only to the first responder,” said the report.
The report said despite best efforts by the CBI probe team, some of the major shortcomings in the evidence were that no blood of Hemraj was found on the bed sheet and pillow of Aarushi. There was no evidence to prove that Hemraj was killed in the room of Aarushi. Dragging mark on the steps only indicated that murder has taken place somewhere other than the terrace. On the clothes of Dr. Rajesh Talwar, only the blood of Aarushi was found but there was no trace of blood of Hemraj.
The clothes that Nupur Talwar was wearing in the photograph taken by Aarushi on the night of the incident were seized by the CBI, but no blood was found during forensic examination. Murder weapons were not recovered immediately after the offence. One of the murder weapons, sharp-edged instrument, could never be recovered and experts could not find any blood stain or DNA of victims from the golf stick to directly link it to the crime.
There was no evidence to explain the finger prints on the scotch bottle (which were found along with blood stains of both the victims on the bottle). As per the police diary, it was taken into possession on the morning of May 16, 2008. In spite of best efforts, the fingerprint could not be identified, it noted.
Scientific tests on the couple did not conclusively indicate their involvement. The exact sequence of events between 12-08 midnight to 6 a.m. on May 16 was not clear. “No evidence has emerged to show the clear role of Dr. Rajesh Talwar and Dr. Nupur Talwar, individually, in the commission of crime. A board of experts constituted during the earlier investigation team has given an opinion that the possibility of the neck being cut by a ‘khukri’ cannot be ruled out although doctors who conducted post-mortem have said that cut was made by a trained person with a small surgical instrument,” said the report, adding that there was no evidence to explain the presence of Hemraj’s mobile phone in Punjab after the murders.
The crime had been committed in an enclosed flat, hence no eyewitnesses in the case.
The blood-soaked clothes of the offenders, clothes used to clean up the blood off the floor and the staircase, the sheet on which Hemraj was carried and dragged onto the terrace, the bed cover used to cover the view from the steel iron grill on the roof were not available and hence, could not be recovered, said the CBI, observing that there were critical and substantial gaps in the circumstantial evidence.