quite a few truths
Team Café: What is it that made you follow this case so
closely?
If you enjoyed reading this article, you can help support our journalism by adding OHeraldo as a preferred source.
Avirook Sen: I was asked to cover the trial by the Mumbai
Mirror in mid-2012. I knew little about the case at the time. As I attended the
trial, I found that bizarre and tragic events were taking place on a daily
basis in and around the court. I didn’t go into the case thinking of guilt or
innocence—but I wasn’t untouched by the general consensus that this was an
open-and-shut case; the parents had done it.
What sucked me in were these questions: why then was the CBI
indulging in daily manipulation? Why were so many witnesses changing their
testimonies, developing amnesia, or simply lying? And why was the focus so
concentrated on the conduct of the Talwars rather than on hard evidence? And therefore,
was the case as open-and-shut as it was made out to be?
TC: Can you briefly elucidate how you went about collating
the material for your book?
AS: The book is substantially different from the reports (in
Mumbai Mirror). There was a lot of additional reporting that I did post the
verdict. Since this was a murder trial, there were simple things to look for in
testimonies, evidence, and official documents: credible murder weapons,
plausible motive. Once you start there, the material leads you onto many
discoveries. I like the idea of going through documents looking for things
which may have been missed, cross-referencing. Physically, it was very taxing.
I was quite immersed in it, so I never really thought about the difficulties
that much. But the commute to Ghaziabad, 2-2.5 hours each way, wasn’t ideal.
Neither was the waiting in court – always standing, because the press was
barred from being seated inside.
TC: Did you encounter any problems in doing so?
AS: Nothing that I could not handle. Judge Shyam Lal and I
had very brief interactions during the trial; and these were pleasant. (I
interviewed him at length only after he had retired). As for the CBI, I did
have a couple of brushes – there was some kind of an attempt to throw me out of
court. But like I said, nothing I couldn’t handle.
Every fact/statement in my book is attributable. There is
not a single line that I cannot point to a source. There is no unnamed source.
Some people were offended when I spoke to them but it was important for me to
have them on record. Other’s spoke to me willingly when I told them I am
writing the book.
TC: Your book has been described as an incisive and chilling
analysis of the ills of India’s legal system that has sent two innocent people
to jail.
AS: I’d just like to say that I am deeply grateful for the
reception it has got. The reviewers have been insightful and kind, and above
all, readers seem to have embraced it. It has sparked discussion on several
important issues. I could not have asked for more.
TC: What kind of impact has your book had since its release?
AS: It is difficult to estimate ‘impact’, but the
conversation around miscarriage of justice, our criminal justice system, our
attitude as a society, our media – has certainly gotten livelier. It does raise
questions about the case. I think, even today, there are many who still believe
the Talwars are guilty. They are entitled to their opinion, but all I am saying
now through my book is to hold an informed opinion. Look at the records. It is
the CBI’s own papers that I’ve depended upon, their own witness testimonies.
The matter is in court. So look at it.
Whether all of this will translate into the delivery of
justice remains to be seen. Either way we will find out even more about the
case and ourselves as the Aarushi story writes itself.
TC: What about the Talwars?
AS: The Talwars remain in jail, in Dasna Uttar Pradesh. They
have now spent more than a year and a half there, and as I have detailed in the
book, that does have an impact. They will shortly go in appeal to the Allahabad
High Court, where they believe justice will finally prevail.
