Indrani Mukerjea, prime accused in the Sheena Bora murder case, has claimed that she had “strong reasons to believe” that her husband Peter Mukerjea, a co-accused, “may have conspired and abducted” her daughter Sheena in 2012. This is the first time in two years since Indrani and Peter, the founders of INX Network were arrested in the murder case, that Indrani has placed the blame of the alleged disappearance of Sheena, her daughter, on Peter.
On Wednesday, Indrani submitted a two-page handwritten application to the special CBI court seeking the call data records of Peter’s BPL mobile number.
“I have strong reasons to believe that accused number 4, Pritam Mukerjea with the assistance of other persons including accused number 3 turned approver Shyamvar Pinturam Rai may have conspired and abducted my daughter, Sheena Bora, in 2012 and made her untraceable and subsequently destroyed evidence. I also believe that A4 (Peter) with other persons may have manipulated circumstances to frame me and have influenced witnesses, situations and information to lead to my arrest on August 25, 2015, for a heinous crime that they may have committed, aided and abetted,” the application states.
Indrani has expressed gratitude to the court for its endeavour to “provide justice” to Sheena, “who may have lost her life on account of greed, betrayal, jealousy, lust and ill-will of persons whom she dearly loved and trusted”.
She has claimed that obtaining Peter’s call records may reveal that other persons were involved in Sheena’s disappearance. “…there will be more clarity if A4 and other persons have a role in framing me,” Indrani has said in her application.
She has sought Peter’s phone call records from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2012 (the year Sheena was allegedly killed), and from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2015 (the year Indrani and Peter were arrested).
Indrani’s application was given to Peter before he left for Arthur Road jail. Advocate Shrikant Shivade, who represents him, said he did not want to comment on the application and would file a reply as per the court’s directions.