The movie,

Talvar

, has triggered a heated debate over whether justice was done in the Aarushi case & if due process was followed.

Arun Kumar

Anshul Chaturvedi & Saloni Bhatia

How would you rate the effort to bring this story alive on screen through the movie?

Logon ko pata nahi chala ki film kab aayi, kab chali gayi.

Did you see anything on screen which would make you say, yes, this is just as it happened?

That scene in the movie where the CBI says it has 'seized' the murder weapon - the golf club - and Irrfan laughs and says 'but didn't the supposed killer himself find it and give it to you'. It's almost bizarre. Is that how it happened?

Jaisa uss mein dikhaya gaya hai, woh bilkul true hai.

So this is a unique case where the murder weapon is with the investigators because the person who allegedly committed the murder searched for it and then came to personally give it to the authorities? There's no 'filmy' touch to it?

Bilkul, bilkul!

haqeeqat

It did not make anyone question the rationality of the whole argument? That a man who has supposedly killed someone with a weapon which the police has been unable to trace will search it out himself?

Yehi to cheezein hain jo gale ke neeche nahi utarti.

The servants, who were, to your mind, the primary suspects -would they be available for further investigation if this case were to be ever reopened?

So if the case reopens, they can't be questioned afresh, since they are untraceable?

It's believed that you wanted that tiled piece, where the blood-stained handprint had been washed off by rain, to be sent abroad for a touch DNA test? Why wasn't it sent -rather, why hasn't it been sent, since the option existed?

Is it true that Rajesh Talwar also wanted that hand print sent for DNA testing?

Would it be possible to send that wall print sample even now?

Mere khayal se abhi bhi ho sakta hai.

What would be the rationale behind such a decision?

The view of the second team was contrary to yours. It said the tests didn't prove much, they were overrated, the sound test was done with spoons, etc.

toh aap ko us samay jo investigator thaa uss key khilaaf kaarwaahi karni chahiye

A scene from the movie where Irrfan Khan portrays Kumar.

Everything (the pillow cover, khukri) is with the CBI. The pertinent question everyone is asking 'if the same organisation is conducting the investigation, how can you not include the findings of one team in the findings of the second team?

Isn't your opinion a widely shared one?

You may not ask Vishal Bhardwaj to make a movie, but he and Meghna did come to you of their own.

The way the police were quick to jump to salacious theories -or character assassination, depends on how you see it -does it reflect that the probe can get caught up in the attraction of scandal?

Haan, yeh toh hai hi baat.

READ IN HINDI:

आरूषि: मां-बाप को दोषी नहीं मानता यह अफसर

He was the CBI officer who found gaping holes in the UP police theory that the Talwar parents were the killers of their daughter, Aarushi. And just as he was to sew up the case,was taken off the case. His frustration has been depicted with unerring accuracy by Irrfan in Talvar, a film on the double murder . Here is Kumar baring himself in an exclusive tell-all interview with. Excerpts:Fast-Track The Talwar Trial: Join Times CampaignIt is very close to reality. The crux of the issue is portrayed very accurately in the movie and it is also 70%-80% accurate in the depiction of the facts as they actually happened. It is as true to life as it could have been.When something is overly fictionalized, people also don't take it very seriously. There was 'Rahasya', it was totally fictionalized, people didn't discuss it.I think Talvar couldn't have treated the case better than this. All the viewpoints have been given. Nothing has been exaggerated and all the sensibilities have been taken care of.If you are making a film, at a stage where the conviction is done and the appeal is pending, this is the best balance that one can have.The taking over of the case, the sound test, the washed away hand print, the finding of the golf club ­ many scenes are almost exact reconstructions of what happened, how things unfolded.The second CBI team had seen in photographs that two golf clubs were in Hemraj 's room. While they located one, the other remained untraced. It wasn't found for some time and then it was Talwar himself who searched for it, found it in the attic and gave it to the CBI, just the way it is shown in the film.It is what is in the film, and this is theof the case.Nobody knows where they are, nobody kept track of them, nobody followed it up... Nobody knows where they are. The servants were not even quizzed by the UP Police before we stepped in. When Nupur Talwar called Hemraj's phone, first it was disconnected and then unreachable.The call records showed that the phone was in Jalvayu Vihar and that was one of the clues that led us to investigating the servants.It all depends on the court. The court can ask for a retrial, can ask for a new team, can acquit them or just leave it there -these are all things of the future.These are the unanswered questions. The hand print on the wall was taken and it is lying with the CBI. During my time, there was an advanced system of touch DNA in UK. There are advanced techniques abroad that can extract DNA from even the smallest portion. I had ensured that even though the hand print was washed in rain, that part was cut and brought. Forensics is one of the saddest areas of our country. Even that bottle must be lying with the CBI. The fingerprints were there but as there was contamination, we couldn't get any evidence.It wasn't sealed and in the film they show that the person collects the bottle without wearing gloves. Actually, the bottle was collected after fourfive days and that too when the media pointed it out. But by then all the fingerprints were lost.Yes, once he heard that this was an option, he supported the idea.Theoretically, yes, it's possible that the DNA can be extracted from the pillow covers, or other places, even now. This piece of evidence was with the CBI, there was the option to send it abroad for more detailed forensic examination, and a conscious call was taken not to send it.See, this will amount to commenting on the functioning or the decisions of the second CBI team, which I don't want to do. It will be said that everything has been seen at the level of the Supreme Court. But why did it go to the Supreme Court? It went to adjudicate on the bail plea. The Supreme Court was not examining the trial; that has not happened so far. And as far as the trial goes, it is commonly known, as Avirook Sen's book tells us, that the judgment had been written even before the defence began its arguments. As a citizen, after you've seen and hear all this, prima facie it appears to be a case of wrongful conviction. But that is for the judicial system to decide.The sound test was not done just with a spoon -the whole process was done in a thorough and scientific manner. If it was not, the test could have been refuted and the findings of the test questioned. That has not been done. Until you counter the findings of the first team by declaring that those findings and the process were wrong - and if that is the case- but if you have not done that, then you can't discount it either. The SP in the second team has placed on record that no case is made out against the Talwars.That's been shown in the film. In a blind investigation, you try to find the lead and then basis that lead, you try to find out the truth. Here somehow, it feels that the conclusion was drawn first and then the evidence collected. I wouldn't say it was cooked up, but they were somehow put together... That is a big question. It's a great mystery . There could have been two options for the second team -one they could have followed both the leads about the servants and the undone part of it and along with that, the parents' theory also, and then found the truth. But the way they have proceeded means that they closed the first line and started doing things to follow the parents' theory .I think nobody will now get to know who actually killed both of them. A lot more things can be said, but it is not appropriate to discuss the functioning of one team versus the other. The purpose is not that. We are not more powerful than a trial court and we cannot sit on judgment, but as independent citizens we have an opinion, and I know the facts of this very closely , and I have my opinion.I can't ask Vishal Bhardwaj to make a film keeping my opinion in mind, can I? So if this film has been made, it means that there is independent thought which also questions what has happened. Harish Salve onwards, many eminent independent jurists have made the point that this is a wrongful conviction. There is definitely a direction of public opinion.Our judicial system says that the primary premise is that an innocent person must not be punished. Whether an innocent person has been punished is for the higher courts to decide and adjudicate.Yes, I think they have taken the views of every party . I remember meeting them in Lucknow when I was posted there. This was maybe around two years ago ... they had told me that they are thinking of making a movie on this. We talked and they asked me many questions like why I was removed. I couldn't answer many of their questions. But they have done their own research.I think the stories about Aarushi and Hemraj were planted by Krishna. He was with the local police the whole day while they were looking for Hemraj.While the second body wasn't found, he took it as a god-sent opportunity to float that story .The Nithari case happened around that time. Moninder Singh Pandher was the subject of a lot of analysis. The court was also convinced by the same logic and it convicted him. And later the HC passed a stricture on that conviction. One argument was that since he would bring girls over to his house, his servant was provoked by that and to satisfy his own desires, he did what he did. The legal term for such accountability is vicarious liability. If we began to convict people on that account, any media or film could be held accountable for a crime committed by someone.