Peter Mukerjea on Thursday denied allegations leveled by his wife and the prime accused in the sensational Sheena Bora murder case, Indrani Mukerjea. Peter, in a written reply to the special court in Mumbai, said that Indrani's accusations appeared to be a "desperate attempt by her to wriggle out of the situation".
was "plotting a sinister conspiracy to drag his name into the murder case," CNN-News 18 reported.
The allegations were "wanton and baseless" and "based on the figment of Indrani's imagination", the reply said.
Following this, the CBI court on 18 November had asked Peter and CBI to file their replies on the accusations made by Indrani.
The CBI took the same line, dubbing Indrani Mukerjea's application as mala-fide and filed with dishonest intentions.
There was sufficient evidence "to prove the allegat ions against her and other accused including the role played by each accused in commission of the offence", it said.
The CBI said that Indrani Mukerjea had made all the efforts, after abduction and killing of Sheena, to destroy the evidence.
Indrani Mukerjea filed the application to "divert/twist the attention and concentration of approver Shyamwar Rai" (the couple's former driver) whose cross-examination is now "at a crucial stage", the agency said.
Rai's testimony is crucial in the case and levels serious charges on Indrani.
Rai has given the police an elaborate account of how Mukerjea conspired to eliminate Sheena. Mukerjea planned the murder with her ex-husband Sanjeev Khanna. Rai also told the court how the three of them executed the plot.
Judge JC Jagdale sought to know from lawyers of both sides whether Indrani Mukerjea's application can be considered under section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act. The section deals with a situation where a person's confession affects not only his/her own case, but that of other accused too.
He also asked the lawyers to state if Indrani's allegations are "exculpatory" (favouring her own case or absolving her) or "inculpatory" (incriminating her).
The court would hear the arguments on 5 December.
Although she fell short of explicitly accusing Peter of the murder, Indrani had said he and Shyamwar Rai could be behind Sheena's abduction and destruction of evidence.
Indrani also alleged that Peter and others, may have framed her and influenced witnesses and situations that led to her arrest. She sought the call data record for the period between January 2012 and December 2012, and from January 2015 to December 2015.
"I am convinced that if we are able to obtain the call data record of Peter, we will be in a better position to ascertain if Peter and other persons were involved in the disappearance of my daughter Sheena and there will be more clarity if Peter and other persons have a role in framing me," she said in the application.
Peter, meanwhile, said that the claims made by Indrani were a "figment of her imagination." He said his wife was making such accusations to play the victim card, while trying to shift the blame on him.
This was not the first time that the couples strained relationship was evident in public. Their issues came to the forefront in January this year, when Indrani approached a Special CBI court to seek divorce following the framing of charges.
Besides, Indrani recently wrote a letter to Peter, which was leaked in the media over their strained relationship. Calling out his "two-faced behaviour", she accused him of ignoring her in the public eye. She also alleged that Rai and Peter's son Rahul were both giving false testimony against her.
The sensational murder case came to light in 2015, when Rai was arrested for illegal possession of fire arms. During the interrogation, he told police about the Sheena's murder, which took place in April 2012. He also led police to the spot in Raigad district where her body had been dumped. Subsequently, police arrested Indrani Mukerjea, her former husband Sanjeev Khanna and later Peter Mukerjea, her current husband.
Published Date: Nov 23, 2017 08:22 pm | Updated Date: Nov 23, 2017 09:27 pm