Claiming that much of the prosecution evidence in the Jessica Lal murder case was false and created doubts, prime accused Manu Sharma's counsel Ram Jethmalani on Tuesday told the Delhi High Court that his client deserves to be given the benefit of doubt.
Accusing the police of fabricating evidence against Sharma, he told a division bench comprising Justice R S Sodhi and Justice P K Bhasin that police had failed to find the real culprit and prosecuted Sharma for murdering Lal.
"Two-thirds of the evidence produced by the prosecution is false. When majority of the evidence is false, the whole case is doubtful," Jethmalani argued.
Resuming his arguments, the counsel referred to the testimony of hostile witness Shyan Munshi and said Munshi's testimony corroborated ballistic reports in the true sense given by three experts (Roop Singh, P S Minocha and his junior Satyender Singh) regarding the empty catridges.
He submitted that according to the reports, two weapons were used in the crime. As per the report of the first expert, Roop Singh, the catridges were used from two different fire arms which clearly went in favour of his client. When the police failed to get a favourable report, it went to another expert (Minocha) to get an opinion contrary to the first one, he added.
Minocha and his junior (Singh) gave a report in favour of Sharma but created a confusion stating that a concrete report can be given only when the suspected weapon was brought before him, Jethmalani argued.
Then the prosecution started accusing Sharma's father for influencing these experts, he told the bench.