Peter Mukerjea in court: Here are the four latest twists in the Sheena Bora case

The Sheena Bora murder case took another twist on Thursday night with the CBI arresting Peter Mukerjea — media baron and husband of one of the main accused Indrani Mukerjea. He was booked under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code, which relates to causing the disappearance of evidence of offence, or providing false information. After taking over the case under acrimonious circumstances on 29 September, the CBI on Thursday filed a ‘1,000 page’ chargesheet in the case against Indrani, her former husband Sanjeev Khanna and driver Shyamvar Rai. It was the latter’s statement that as per Times Now reports, ’nailed Peter’. [caption id=“attachment_2419800” align=“alignleft” width=“380”] File image of Peter Mukerjea. PTI[/caption] The man who knew too much According to sources quoted by The Economic Times, Peter had been ‘evasive’ during his CBI examination on Thursday, which eventually led to the arrest. The sources went on to share that they suspected Peter’s possible involvement in the case after he gave ‘contradictory’ responses to CBI questions on Sheena’s murder. The Indian Express quotes a CBI official as saying, “She has given enough indications… he knew of the murder.” Not just that.  The Hindu reports that Peter not only knew about the murder but also knew for over a decade that Sheena was Indrani’s daughter. Shortly after Peter and Indrani’s wedding in 2003, a letter from Indrani’s Guwahati-based parents requesting ‘financial support for her two children, Sheena and Mikhail’ reportedly landed on Peter’s desk at work. The money trail A report in DNA highlights the possible financial angle in the case that may have been a reason leading to Peter’s arrest. It mentions that the Sheena murder investigation had earlier revealed that Peter and Indrani had taken a loan of Rs 87 crore, of which only half went into buying shares of INX Media Private Limited — the media house owned by the couple. The report goes on to add that INX Media was shown in 2012 as having paid ‘one of its directors’ — which could either refer to Peter or Indrani — Rs 87 crore, which was apparently couched as a ‘loss on the share’ of the company. That this development emerged shortly after April, which was when Sheena was alleged to have been murdered, is suspicious enough, but DNA also notes that the transactions should have been portrayed as a gain rather than a ‘loss’. Complicit cops? Another angle that has emerged in recent months is the role of the police in the whole issue. The Economic Times report points out that some IPS officers from the Maharashtra Police are under the CBI’s scanner, but their identities were naturally not revealed. At the same time, DNA quotes former IPS officer and lawyer YP Singh as saying, “I am not sure whether the Mumbai Police were shielding Peter, but it is clear that proper steps of interrogation were not followed even though he was under suspicion… The Mumbai police definitely will have to answer (for) it.” Is there more to the Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis’ remark that the police had ‘ shown a lot of involvement and attention'  in this particular case, and the subsequent decision to hand the investigation over to the CBI? Legal representation Nevertheless, Peter will be produced in court on Friday. But who will represent him? That’s another blurry area in this extremely hazy case. His lawyer Mahesh Jethmalani said he was surprised at the decision of CBI to place him under arrest. “I will be extremely shocked if the news about his arrest is true,” he said, and added, “I contacted him through messages and my last contact was well past 7.30 PM when he informed me that he was being questioned by the CBI and that he would contact me later.” However, The Indian Express quotes the senior lawyer as saying, “I was informed about Peter’s arrest by his sister this evening. I will not be representing Peter Mukerjea. I don’t know who will be representing him in this case.” With inputs from PTI