IN THE Sheena Bora murder case, accused Peter Mukerjea has alleged that the Call Data Record (CDR) of accused-turned-prosecution witness Shyamvar Rai produced in the court is either “tampered or manipulated” by investigators.
On Friday, Mukerjea filed two applications seeking CDR of Rai disabling the option of “enable editing” and his mobile phone that was in use at the time of his arrest on August 21, 2015, from Carter Road in Bandra. Mukerjea’s lawyer, Shrikant Shivade, is currently cross-examining Rai.
In his first application, Mukerjea has said that the nodal officer of telecom company, Airtel, has produced certain printouts of a telephone number allegedly belonging to Rai. It says that if the nodal officer takes the print out of the CDR with the option of “enable editing”, any column or row can be deleted, altered or added.
It also states that law requires that for any such document to be produced as evidence, a certificate under the Indian Evidence Act is mandatory. “Surprisingly, the alleged CDR produced by the nodal officer of Airtel shows that the said has been either tampered with or manipulated and as such no certificate has been issued while providing the CDR,” the application states.
It adds that the column “call time” appears to have been deleted while taking printouts and the call date has been inserted.
Mukerjea claimed in his second application, that the International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI) number — a unique identification or serial number of a mobile phone — of Rai’s phone provided by the prosecution is “fictitious”.
It is the CBI’s case that Rai was arrested in August 2015 from Carter Road in Bandra with an illegal firearm. It was during the interrogation of this case that Rai allegedly revealed about his involvement in a murder that took place on April 24, 2012, of Sheena Bora, the daughter of his former employer, Indrani Mukerjea. Rai claimed that it was committed by Indrani, along with her former husband, Sanjeev Khanna, in a conspiracy with her husband, Peter Mukerjea, a co-founder of INX Media.
“The accused states that the entire incident of seizure of weapon at Carter Road has been seriously disputed by the accused and in order to support this fictitious incident, the CDRs have been manipulated by the police,” Mukerjea’s application states.
He has sought for the court to direct that the mobile phone used by Rai in 2015 be produced in the court for the purpose of cross-examination. He has also sought for the CDR to be produced in the presence of a court officer or
in the presence of respective advocates of the prosecution and defence.
Special Judge J C Jagdale has directed the CBI to file its reply on the applications, adjourning the case to next week. In the trial, Rai is being cross-examined since August by each of the three accused person’s lawyers.