The arguments that nailed Manu

Following were the arguments before the Delhi high court on which prosecution had sought setting aside the trial court verdict acquitting Manu Sharma and eight others in the Jessica Lal murder case.

• Enough evidence against Manu as the testimonies of star witnesses Bina Ramani, her daughter Malini and husband George Mailhot support prosecution theory. They identified him to be the person in white T-shirt and blue jeans, who shot Jessica on intervening night of April 29-30, 1999, at the south Delhi restaurant and bar at the party hosted by them.
• Witness Deepak Bhajwani's statement corroborates the prosecution stand. Trial court's judgement rejecting witnesses' testimony is purely perverse and erroneous. The statement of complainant and the eyewitness, Shyan Munshi, to be rejected as he was influenced by Sharma family and also lied.
• Ignore the ballistic reports, which gave two-weapon theory, as the family of the accused manipulated the reports.
• Manu had bought a .22 bore pistol which matched with prosecution case that .22 bore pistol was used in the crime.
• The mobile and telephone detail of all the accused and their frantic calls to each other and also to their families give a clear picture that they were involved in the crime.
• The post-incident conduct of all the accused including Manu, who went underground, established their complicity in the crime.