Sheena Bora Murder: A Flawed Probe and a Chargesheet in Tatters
The CBI is struggling to connect multiple dots to solve the sensational murder of Sheena Bora.
advertisement
More than four months of investigation and a highly deficient chargesheet later, the Sheena Bora murder is nowhere near solved. The CBI continues to grope in the dark for the motive behind the killing of the 24-year-old girl in Mumbai on April 24, 2012, allegedly by her mother and two others.
The CBI, which took over the case from the Mumbai Police on September 18 last year, arrested Peter Mukerjea, the former television tycoon. His wife, Indrani, is the principal accused, along with her Kolkata-based ex-husband Sanjeev Khanna and driver Shyamwar Rai, in Sheena’s murder.
Even as the investigating agency continues to struggle to connect multiple dots to solve the sensational murder, an examination of the first chargesheet against Indrani, Khanna and Rai reveals serious flaws and contradictions in the CBI’s narrative so far.
Murder in a Moving Car
First, the chargesheet says that Sheena was murdered in a moving car (which left Bandra and headed for Pali Hill) that was being driven by Rai that fateful evening of April 24, 2012. Indrani is said to have offered Sheena, who took the rear seat next to her mother, a drink, possibly water. This was laced with a drug which made Sheena drowsy.
The chargesheet claims that Indrani, Khanna and Rai took part in killing Sheena who bit the driver’s hand in the course of a struggle. It strains credulity that a drowsy Sheena, who at that time was being strangled by Indrani while Khanna held her head, in the rear seat, could bite the hand of the driver sitting behind the steering wheel. The Mumbai Police had claimed that Sheena was strangulated with a stole.
Second, the CBI’s story that Sheena was murdered in a moving car that headed for Pali Hill after Sheena was picked up near Amarsons store on Linking Road in Bandra is at complete variance with the Mumbai Police’s conclusion that she was murdered in a desolate lane behind National College, Bandra.
Driver’s Version is Suspect
With much of the information wringed out of Rai, on whom the Mumbai Police had planted a gun, it may be safely assumed that he was pressured to present an inspired sequence of events – first by the Mumbai cops and then by the CBI. The contents of Rai’s statement before a magistrate, recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code, is believed to very different from what he is said to have revealed to the police.
The Mystery Gun
Highly placed Mumbai Police sources whom The Quint spoke to in September and October, before and after the CBI took over the case, did not deny that the gun was planted on Rai whose movements were found to be suspicious by a team of Mumbai Police officers led by Inspector Dinesh Kadam on the evening of August 19, 2015. The cops took Rai in and slapped an Arms Act case against him. The case, curiously, was never investigated.
The third glaring contradiction in the CBI’s chargesheet is the agency’s story on how the gun came into Rai’s possession. The CBI claims that the gun and three bullets, which were found in the boot of the car in which Sheena was allegedly killed, belonged to one Sujit Kumar Sarkar, the bodyguard of a Kolkata-based businessman Abhijit Sen whom Indrani knew very well.
The gun, the CBI alleges, was given to Rai by Sarkar on Indrani’s instructions. Why would Sarkar simply hand over a weapon with three rounds to a person he did not know? It is a criminal offence to give a gun to another person. Was the gun licenced? If so, Sarkar should have been arrested, though he was simply questioned and let off. Besides, where did Sarkar procure the gun from? There was no follow-up investigation to ascertain this.
Disturbing Questions Surrounding the Murder
- CBI claimed Sheena Bora was offered a drink by Indrani. Soon she was drowsy. Indrani strangled her while Sanjeev Khanna held her head.
- Driver Shyamwar Rai was at the steering wheel. So how was he bitten by Sheena? Mumbai Police concluded murder took place in a desolate lane behind National College, Bandra.
- CBI’s finding is that murder took place in a moving car after it headed towards Pali Hill from Linking Road, Bandra.
- CBI claims gun and three rounds of ammunition supplied to Shyamwar Rai by Kolkata-based Sujit Kumar Sarkar.
- Where did Sarkar get the weapon? Was it a licenced gun?
- Khanna checked into Hilltop Hotel at 6:05 pm on April 24, 2012. With heavy evening traffic, he couldn’t have made it to Bandra from Worli by 6:30 pm.
- So how was he present at Amarsons showroom on Linking Road at 6:30 pm on April 24, 2012?
- Mikhail Bora has concealed more than he has revealed.
Sanjeev Khanna’s Presence
With the murder case raising a number of disturbing questions on the investigation techniques and methods employed by the Mumbai Police and the CBI, Khanna’s alleged involvement in killing Sheena continues to baffle. Khanna’s lawyer Shreyansh Mithare claimed his client is “innocent” and was framed.
The CBI has neither shared Khanna’s call data record nor other documents over which the agency has claimed privilege over. Information culled from records show that while Peter Mukerjea’s son Rahul has said that when he dropped Sheena at Amarsons he saw a bespectacled man wearing a T-shirt and jeans smoking next to the vehicle in which Indrani was seated around 6:30 pm on April 24, 2012. This he assumed to be Khanna.
But records show Khanna checked into Hilltop Hotel on Pochkanwala Road in Worli at 6:05 pm after flying in from Kolkata. After checking-in, Khanna called up Indrani and spoke to her for about four minutes and went to his room. With heavy evening traffic, he couldn’t have made it to Bandra from Worli by 6:30 pm.
Mikhail Bora Knows Much
What is more intriguing is the CBI’s decision to not bring Indrani’s Guwahati-based son Mikhail Bora’s statement on record. Mikhail’s public statements that on the evening of April 24, 2012, he was at Indrani’s Marlow residence where he had a few drinks and was allegedly drugged by his mother is questionable, to say the least.
Mikhail, who is suspected of knowing more about Sheena’s disappearance, has lied consistently and hidden several facts that the CBI should be interested in finding out. In an interview to a TV news channel, he claimed that he saw Khanna well past midnight and in the early hours of April 25, 2012, at Indrani’s Marlow residence.
Watch the video from 38:00 minutes for Mikhail Bora’s take on Sanjeev Khanna:
Mikhail even went to the extent to claim that it was Khanna who had taken him to a drug rehab centre in 2005. In another statement to the media, he had said that he had never seen or met Khanna before.
Watch the video beginning at 7:15 minutes where Mikhail Bora claims he had never seen or met Sanjeev Khanna:
Buddha Brothers’ Role
Could it be that Mikhail saw a man called Sameer Buddha at Indrani’s Marlow house? Sameer is the brother of Sohail Buddha, a former police officer who had previously worked with his superior Rakesh Maria (the Mumbai Police commissioner who was removed for taking too much interest in the Sheena Bora murder case) and subsequently with Star TV of which Peter Mukerjea was CEO. Of the same build as Khanna, Sameer wears spectacles and sports a thin moustache.
Sameer Buddha, who worked for Indrani’s INX Media between 2005 and 2007, made, at least, two calls on Indrani’s phone around 7:30 pm and 8:30 pm on April 24, 2012, by which time Sheena was either being strangled or was dead. Sohail and Sameer now run Star Enterprises and Star Protection which are into “security and investigations”.
Mikhail claimed in one of the TV interviews that the man he saw at Indrani’s Marlow apartment was Khanna who picked up a cheque. Or was it Sameer who took the cheque from Indrani? Probing the Buddha brothers may be vital for the CBI in the days before February 18, by when the agency is expected to file a supplementary chargesheet against Peter Mukerjea.
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)