The dentist couple are the accused in the case.
In their application, the Talwars had primarily objected to the submission of a clarification letter from the Centre for DNA Fingerprinting and Diagnostics (CDFD), Hyderabad.
The letter mentioned about a typographical error in numbering the forensic samples recovered from the rooms of Hemraj and Krishna, another domestic help of the Talwars. Krishna was at one point an accused in the case but now stands discharged.
Talwars had challenged the CBI’s move to file the clarification letter mainly on the ground that no additional documents could be filed after the investigation was completed and a chargesheet filed.
It was also alleged that the CBI was trying to distort facts in the name of getting the typographical error rectified.
Passing the order, a single-judge bench of Justice Sunil Hali said, “Filing of this document cannot be construed as additional document, but only change of version by a witness whose report has been placed by the prosecution at the time of filing of the chargesheet.”
The court further noted that the clarification letter was only a change of version by a witness, as the official issuing the clarification has been examined and cross-examined as a witness.
The court said, “Defence has every right to question this aspect during the course of trial. Therefore, I am not inclined to agree with.the applicants that this communication could not have been allowed to be taken on record after the initiation of the trial in the case.”
The CBI had sought permission from the trial court on September 29, 2012 to submit at least 10 additional documents, including the clarification letter from the CDFD.
These included seizure memos, reports of the scrutiny of Orkut profile of the victim, call detail reports of some of the mobile phone numbers and some emails related to the case.
The CBI’s main contention was that all these documents had already been generated during the investigation and, under relevant norms of the Criminal Procedure Code, they were required to be submitted before the trial court in original.
The CBI had argued that the same could not be done during filing of the chargesheet due to unavoidable reasons.