A
How will the CBI sort and arrange the "facts" in the Nithari case to make it a credible case? The public waits to be enlightened.
Will we ever get Nithari’s truth? There has been criticism of the media for putting out speculative reports. But media reports have been based on briefings by CBI officials on conditions of anonymity. True, reporters should use their judgement while receiving inspired leaks. But what really impels the CBI investigators to give a running commentary while investigating this landmark crime? The media bore responsibility for leaks by anonymous officials. But this changed after the CBI director himself briefed the press last fortnight.
The director said that organ trade was ruled out. "None of the (pieces of) evidence received so far has revealed that the killings were done for organ trade," he said. He added that they had not yet found evidence of cannibalism either. He said they had still not arrived at the real motive: all the killings were committed by one of the two, either Moninder Singh Pandher or his servant, Surendra Koli. More forensic reports were awaited. The CBI director said a chargesheet would probably be filed within three months.
Why not withhold comment for three months then? "No evidence received so far" is not enough reason to rule out any possible motive. Subsequently, CBI sources said the maidservant, Maya, who allegedly lured the children, would undergo lie detector tests. A six-year-old child who escaped kidnapping had identified Maya. Meanwhile, police officers are reported to have been officially charged with receiving bribes from the suspects.
On rational grounds, a psychopathic motive in the case does not make sense. Consider the following facts, revealed so far by the police themselves: the servant confessed to the killings; the victims were not only lured by him but also by the maid; the master knew of the killings; the bribes paid to the police were presumably by the master; if the servant was a psychopathic killer, what motivated the master and the maid to become complicit? And would bribes be paid continually unless the killings in some way generated funds?
These are some of the points that come to mind after the disclosures made by theCBI itself. How will it sort and arrange these facts to make a credible case? The public waits to be enlightened.
(Puri can be reached at rajinderpuri2000@yahoo.com)