Indrani’s ‘Sheena is alive’ claim: CBI court seeks CCTV footage from Guwahati airport

Mumbai The special CBI court on Thursday directed Guwahati airport authority to submit the CCTV footage of its security screening of January 5 when two lawyers had allegedly spotted Sheena Bora

Mumbai The special CBI court on Thursday directed Guwahati airport authority to submit the CCTV footage of its security screening of January 5 when two lawyers had allegedly spotted Sheena Bora. The direction came on an application filed by former INX Media CEO Indrani Mukerjea, who is facing trial for allegedly killing her daughter - Sheena Bora.

A file photo of Indrani Mukerjea and her daughter Sheena Bora. (PTI Photo)

Advocate Ranjeet Sangle, representing Indrani, had claimed that one of the lawyers had known Sheena since 2007 and she had also filed an affidavit along with the video shot by them. Sangle had urged the court to ask the agency to ascertain the woman’s identity.

The CBI had, on the other hand, said that in view of the evidence on record it was impossible that Sheena was alive.

“When it is clearly established based on evidence that Sheena was dead and she was killed by accused/applicant along with others, the wild claims made by applicant/accused or advocate Saveena T Bedi are not sustainable as it would amount to a mockery of justice. Further, the DNA report established that the skeleton found during investigation was that of Sheena,” it said.

The agency also relied on the evidence of Indrani’s driver Shyamvar Rai, who has since turned approver. “Rai’s testimony clearly proves that Sheena was killed by accused persons,” the CBI said and urged the court to reject the plea.

Sangle, however, questioned the expert who had given the DNA report, which stated that the remains were of Sheena and Indrani was the biological mother of the deceased. The lawyer claimed that admittedly some of the entries on the chart were subsequently made.

Besides, Sangle relied on the deposition of Rahul Mukerjea who, he claimed, to have admitted that he had chatted with Sheena in August 2012, months after she was allegedly killed. Rahul is son of Peter Mukerjea, Indrani’s ex-husband and an accused in the case.

After hearing both sides, the court allowed Indrani’s plea, saying there was no harm in ascertaining if the woman seen at the airport was the purported victim.

The court said Indrani’s application needed to be considered under section 91 of the CrPC which confers power on the court to issue summons to produce document or other thing for the purpose of the trial. The court also took into consideration the fact that Indrani had earlier filed an application, seeking order to probe her claim that a woman had seen Sheena in Srinagar.

“Therefore, considering the consistent defence of Indrani, the said contention cannot be brushed aside,” the court said.

As per the prosecution, Indrani, her ex-husband Sanjeev Khanna, and driver Rai allegedly strangulated Sheena, Indrani’s daughter from her first partner, in a car on April 24, 2012, in Mumbai. They dumped her body in a forest in Raigad district the following day.