TALVAR

PLOT:

When ShrutiTandon body was discovered on 16 May by her parents Ramesh and
NutanTandon, the missing servant Khempal was considered as the main suspect . However,
the next day, his partially decomposed body was discovered on the terrace . The police were
heavily criticized for failing to secure the crime scene immediately . After ruling out the
family's ex-servants, the police considered Shruti’s parents Dr. Ramesh Tandon and
NutanTandonas the prime suspects. The police suspected that Ramesh had murdered the two
after finding them in an "objectionable" position, or because Ramesh's alleged extra-marital
affair had led to his blackmail by Khempaland a confrontation with ShrutiTandon . The
accusations enraged the Tandons' family and friends, who accused the police of framing the
Tandons in order to cover up the botched-up investigation . The case was then transferred to
the CDI (Criminal Department of Investigation), which exonerated the parents and suspected
the Tandons' assistant Kanahiya and two domestic servants . Based on the 'narco' interrogation
conducted on the three men, the CDI suspected that they had killed Shruti after an attempted
sexual assault, and Khempal for being a witness . The CDI was accused of using dubious
methods to extract a confession, and all the three men were released after it could not find
any solid evidence against them.

In 2009, the CDI handed over the investigation to a new team, which recommended closing
the case due to critical gaps in the evidence . Based on circumstantial evidence, it named
Ramesh Tandon as the sole suspect, but refused to charge him due to lack of any hard
evidence. The parents opposed the closure, calling CDI's suspicion on Rameshwas baseless .
Subsequently, a special CDI court rejected the CDI's claim that there was not enough
evidence, and ordered proceedings against the Tandons.

1
 ANALYSIS OF FACTS

As the present Plot of the movie and all the evidences collected during the investigation
process are purely circumstantial in nature as per the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
Section 5 to 55 deals with Circumstantial evidences. The below analysis on the facts
clearly shows, that the conviction can be based on circumstantial evidences.

FACT 1:- The main relevant fact in issue is the murder of khempal and Shruti at the
same time. ( I DONT KNOW HOW TO PUT FACTS HERE)
SECTION 6 : Relevancy of fact forming part of the same transaction. Facts though not
in issue but are connected in such a way as to form part of the same transaction.
Conditions :- 1. MA’AM NE JO BTAYE THE PRINCIPAL SPONTENOUS AND VO
LIKH DO YHA..... I DONT HAVE NOTES.
Doctrine of proximity
 Proximity of time
 Proximity of place
 Continiuity of action
 Community of purpose
Same transaction means “a transaction which is a group of facts, connected together to be
referred to by a single legal name, a crime, a wrong or any other subject of enquiry which
may be in issue.
ANALYSIS :- As in the present case when knahiya murdered shruti and when khempal saw
that he got very panicked and started blaming Kanhiya and rajpal. Then just to avoid of
getting caught in the murder case they at the same, in the same house, in continuity of shruti’s
murder they murdered Khempal. Thus, the murder of shruti and Khempal form part of the
same transaction.

FACT 1: Mr. Ramesh Tandon being short tempered scolded Kanaiyainfront of the other
staff members because Kanahiya made an incorrect dental cast, which was a very small
mistake.
 SECTION 11: When facts not otherwise relevant become relevant . Facts not
otherwise relevant arerelevant ––(1) if they are inconsistent with any fact in issue or
relevant fact;

2
 (2) if by themselves or in connection with other facts they make the existence or non-
existence ofany fact in issue or relevant fact highly probable or improbable.
 ANALYSIS: When the Narco test was conducted by Dr.SunitaNathani, a question was
raised whether Mr. Tandon is short tempred or not and also, the same question was asked
to the staff members working in clinic . It was answered by one of the staff member that
when Kanahiya made an incorrect dental cast, which was a very small mistake but still
Mr. Tandon got so angry and he shouted on him. Thus, his sudden anger shows his un-
usual behaviour just one week before the murder.
Illustration:-The question that is whether A committed crime at Calcutta on a certain
day. The fact that on that A was in Lahore is relevant as from such a distance a crime cant
be committed.
In the same way Mr. Ramesh Tandon shouted on very trivial fact is not relevant but his
unusual behaviour on that day is relevant in this situation as it shows that he was panicked
about something and was frustrated over a particular fact makes it relevant in the case . As
it states the mental behaviour of Mr. Tondon it can be stated that when he saw Khempal
and Shruti in a relationship he got furious and killed khempal due to his short temper.

FACT 2:As a result Dr.Tandon’s scolding in front of the staff Kanahiya got furious and
he started abusing Dr.Tandon when he was with his friends in the car . Thereafter few days
later he went to Khempal’s room along with Rajpal and they were drinking when Rajpal
narrated the same situation, “Khaniya can’t even do a simple work” listening to this,
Khaniya got angry and said “I feel like killing Dr .Tandon”.Later Kanahiya along with
Rajpal went inside ShrutiTandon’s room in order to rape her but when she retaliated to it,
he killed her by slitting her throat with Kukhri.
 SECTION 14: Facts showing existence of state of mind, or of body of bodily
feeling.Facts showing the existence of any state of mind such as intention, knowledge,
good faith, negligence, rashness, ill-will orgood-will towards any particular person, or
showing the existence of any state of body or bodily feelingare relevant, when the
existence of any such state of mind or body or bodily feeling, is in issue or relevant.
 ANALYSIS:When Dr.Tandon shouted on Khaniya in front of the staff than The section
states that in the chain of relevancy of the existence of the state of mind, or of body or
bodily feeling depicted by the state of mind of the person involved in the commission of
the crime at the relevant time, such as intention knowledge good faith, negligence,

3
 rashness, ill will towards any particular person. The section deals with three components
of the existence of person
i. State of mind
ii. State of body
iii. State of feeling.
Illustration A is tried for a crime: - the fact that he said something indicating an intention
to commit that particular crime is relevant.
As the state of body is related to physical act while, the state of feeling and state of mind
related to psychological fact. As in the movie he was already angry because Mr. Tandon
insulted him in front of the staff. Also, when he was with Rajpal and Khempal he stated
his intention that he wants to kill Mr. Tandon it shows that he was in an angry state of
mind and feeling and therefore by killing ShrutiTandonhe took his revenge. Thus there
was Mens Rea + Actus Reus, which is relevant in present case.

FACT 3:Recovery of “kukhri”, i.e. the murder weapon from Kanahiya’s house.

 SECTION 3: “Document” means any matter expressed or described upon any substance
by means of letters, figures or marks, or by more than one of those means, intended to be
used, or which may be used, for the purpose of recording that matter.
“Evidence” means and include all documents including electronic records produced for
the inspection of the Court; such documents are called documentary evidence.
 SECTION 5:Evidences may be given of facts in issue and relevant facts . Evidence
may be given in any suit or proceeding of the existence of non-existence of every fact in
issue and of such other facts as are hereinafter declared to be relevant, and of no others.
 ANALYSIS: “Kukhri”, the murder weapon which was recovered from Kanahiya’s house
is a real piece of evidence and comes under the definition of documentary evidence as a
wider interpretation can be done as to what comes under the definition of Documentary
evidence.
Also, in the present case Kanahiya causing Shruti’s death by cutting her throat with
Kukhri is a fact in issue and according to section 5 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872,
“evidence may be given in any suit or proceeding of existence or non-existence of every
fact in issue”. So in the present case “Kukhri” is real evidence as it clearly explains the
existence of fact in issue that Kanahiya murdered Shruti by slitting her throat using a
sharp weapon i.e. “Kukhri”.

4
FACT 4: Mr. Ashwini Kumar (CDI Investigating Officer) started beating a boy who was
an eye witness to the murder of Shruti’sTandon, to make him confess that Kanahiya
murdered Shruti and he confessed the same which was later on recorded in the camera.
 SECTION 25: Confession to police officer not to be proved .No confession made to a
police-officer shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence.
 ANALYSIS:As in the present case As per section 25 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872,
extra-judicial confession is not admissible. As in the case of Abdul Rashid v. State of
Bihar1 in the case the accused made a statement to superintendent of police that murder
was committed. In this case the Court held that confession is inadmissible as it was made
to police officer. Even the recorded confession is not admissible in law.
In the same way the crime was confessed and recorded by Mr. Ashwini but it is not
admissible as there was a threat of the officers and it was not in front of the Magistrate .
Thus, it can be presumed that he confessed the crime under the threat officers.

FACT 5: Ramesh Tandon scolded Khaniya for making an incorrect dental cast in front of
people. He nursed that wound and that fateful night, under a drunken state of mind killed
Shruti and also Khempal who witnessed Shruti’s murder.
 SECTION 8: Motive, Preparation and previous or subsequent conduct . It states that
Motive is an important factor in circumstantial evidence, there are four successive stages
in commission of a crime-
1. Motive which can be illustrated by intention to commit a crime;
2. Preparation to commit a crime;
3. Attempt to commit actual crime;
4. Actual commission of crime.
 ANALYSIS:The murderer Kahaniya and his friend Rajpal wandered Tandons’ hall and
drank some wine after killed ShrutiTandon and Khempal. If he would have
unintentionally killed both of them he would have tried to escape from Tandons’ flat
place as soon as possible but he didn’t because it is pre-planned.

FACT 6: The 2nd CDI Investigation team made Dr . Ramesh and NutanTandon as the
prime suspect for the murder of their daughter ShrutiTandon and their servant Khempal .

1
AIR 2001 SC 242

5
  SECTION 114:Court may presume existence of certain facts . The Court may
presume the existence of anyfact which it thinks likely to have happened, regard being
had to the common course of natural events,human conduct and public and private
business, in their relation to the facts of the particular case.
 ANALYSIS:Under Section 114, a court is entitled to "presumption of certain facts"
based on certain reasonable human conduct. This provision was resorted to by the
CDI court to hold that there could be a presumption against the parents that they
would have been in the knowledge of what was happening inside the house when
there were no signs of forced entry by a third person nor was such a case built up by
the defence.

FACT 7:
 Section 106 of the Evidence Act says that when any fact is especially within the
knowledge of any person, the burden of proving that fact is upon him.
 ANALYSIS:In State of Rajasthan vs Thakur Singh, 2005, the apex court gave
sufficient time to the suspected accused to prove their innocence in the case but they
didn’t proved it so, the apex court held that " the burden of proving the guilt of an
accused is on the prosecution, but there may be certain facts pertaining to a crime that
can be known only to the accused, or are virtually impossible for the prosecution to
prove. These facts need to be explained by the accused and if he does not do so, then
it is a strong circumstance pointing to his guilt based on those facts."
Therefore, the prospect of the dentist couple in the ShrutiTandon murder case appears
was hinging on the only fact that the presumption in law of their guilt was so strong
that it could relieve the prosecution from its duty of proving the guilt beyond
reasonable doubt, and that Tandons failed to discharge their duty to explain.

FACT 9: Opinion of Dr.SunitaNathani regarding the Narco Test and Polygraph Test of
Dr. Ramesh Tandon, NutanTandon, Kanahiya and Rajpal.
 SECTION 45: Opinions of experts . When the Court has to form an opinion upon a
point of foreign law or ofscience, or art, or as to identity of handwriting, or finger
impressions, the opinions upon that point ofpersons especially skilled in such foreign

6
 law, science or art, or in questions as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions
are relevant facts.
 ANALYSIS: In the involuntary Narco-Analysis the suspects’ kanhiya and Rajpal
have confessed their involvement in the murders and that on that fateful night they
had gathered in the room of khempal in Mr. Tandon residence. They have also
confessed that on that night they had gathered and heard songs on nepali channel one .
The CDI team confirmed the same was confirmed that those songs which had been
described by the suspects in the narco- analysis had been played on her channel.
polygraphic tests and narcotics test conducted multiple times on the parents came out
clean. It fits their statement, it disagrees with speculations brought forth by the earlier
investigating team, and pretty much strengthens the benefit of doubt on their side . The
same tests when conducted on the servants, all of them not only agreed to the murder
of shruti, but they corroborated on their statement that they killed the another guy
because he was the non-cooperative participant in the whole scene. (CASE LAW
MA’AM NE KYA LIKHYA H DEKH LO)

FACT ... the email report and Internet Router Report

Section 45 A deals with examination of Electronic Records.
An opinion on the bais of electronics records can be given by the experts. As in the case after
Shruti’s murder still the internet router was used which is a electronic evidence would be
admissible in court of law.