Peter, driver may have been behind my daughter’s disappearance: Indrani Mukerjea

Indrani moved an application before the special CBI court calling for Peter’s call data records (CDR) for his BPL mobile number

In a new twist to the Sheena Bora murder case, Indrani Mukerjea has now said she suspects her husband Peter and driver Shyamwar Rai had abducted ‘her daughter’ Sheena and made her untraceable.

In her plea, Indrani further alleged Peter, by using his influence, manipulated evidence and got her falsely implicated in the case. (Hindustan Times)

On Wednesday, Indrani moved an application before the special CBI court calling for Peter’s call data records (CDR) for his BPL mobile number. The Sheena Bora murder trial has seen the couple throw several allegations against each other — both are in judicial custody in the case and are in separate jails. In the fresh set of accusation Indrani has alleged that the entire conspiracy behind disappearance of Sheena has been hatched by Peter along with several other people.

Indrani further alleged Peter, by using his influence, manipulated evidence and got her falsely implicated in the case. To prove her point, Indrani has sought Peter’s CDR between January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2012, and January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2015.

In her plea, Indrani, in a two-page handwritten application further states, “I have strong reasons to believe that Peter, with the assistance of the other persons, including accused-turned-approver Shyamwar Rai, may have conspired and abducted my daughter, Sheena Bora in 2012 and made her untraceable and subsequently destroyed evidence.”

Indrani further alleged that, “I also blame that Peter along with other persons may have manipulated circumstances to frame me and have influenced witnesses, situations and information to lead to my arrest on 25/8/2015 for a heinous crime that they may have committed.”

Seeking CDR of Peter, Indrani pleaded that, ‘if we are able to obtain CDR 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.”

On Wednesday, the court was scheduled to record evidence of approver Rai. Before the hearing could begin, Indrani approached the judged with her application and said she suspects her husband was behind the disappearance of her daughter and she has been falsely implicated in the case.

The court, however, refused to accept the application in the absence of her lawyer and asked her to move the same through her advocate on record. Later, after the hearing, she moved the plea and asked for Peter’s call data records. The court asked Indrani to serve the copy to Peter’s legal team so that they can respond to the plea.