Sheena Bora murder: Sanjeev Khanna’s plea to attend trial from Kolkata rejected

A CBI court has rejected accused Sanjeev Khanna's plea to attend the Sheena Bora murder trial through video conferencing, stating that the Bombay High Court had imposed a condition for physical attendance. Khanna's lawyer argued that it was difficult and expensive for him to travel to court for all hearings. The court referred to the bail conditions set by the high court and said that granting the plea would amount to modifying the order, which is beyond its power.

Mumbai: A special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court has rejected the plea of Sanjeev Khanna, an accused in the Sheena Bora murder case, to attend the trial from Kolkata through video conferencing. The court said the Bombay high court, while granting him bail, had imposed a condition to attend the trial court physically during all hearings.

Mumbai; India- 20 Nov 2015 : Sheena Bora murder case accused Sanjeev Khanna, Ex-Husband of Indrani Mukerjea, was produces at Esplanade court, in Mumbai: India: on Friday: Nov 20: 2015. (Photo by Bhushan Koyande)

Khanna had pleaded that his mother was unwell and he must look after her in Kolkata. His lawyer Harshman Chavan said that it was difficult and expensive for Khanna to travel to the court for his physical appearance on all the hearing dates. Khanna would abide by the other bail conditions, Chavan said.

CBI objected to the plea, saying that as per the conditions on which Khanna was granted bail, he is not entitled to file such an application.

Chavan, on the other hand, said that the source point coordinator is available and is appointed at the district court in Kolkata and thus, the necessary arrangement of video conferencing to attend the trial can be done at Kolkata. Virtual attendance in trial and physical presence are no different, Chavan had contended.

Thus, the special CBI court, after referring to the order, said, “When such particular and specific directions for securing the presence of applicant/accused have been mentioned by the Bombay high court, then it goes without saying that the applicant/accused should obey and follow the said directions in letter and spirit. If the prayer of the applicant/accused is to be granted, then obviously it would mean that this court has to do away with the physical presence of the accused.”

This, the court said, would amount to modifying the order of the high court for which the special court has no power. Hence the court said Khanna’s plea is not tenable and bound to be rejected.