Sheena Murder Case: What are Top Cops Maria and Bharti Concealing?

Rakesh Maria and Deven Bharti must clear the air about whether their involvement in the case was motivated or not.

There are questions Deven Bharti and Rakesh Maria must answer to clear discrepancies in the investigation. (Photo: Rahul Gupta/ The Quint)

On 28 August 2015, three days after Indrani Mukerjea’s arrest (on charges of murdering her daughter Sheena Bora), former Mumbai Police Commissioner Rakesh Maria told eager reporters outside Khar police station that Sheena’s passport had been recovered from Dehradun that very day.

It was a big revelation. The recovery was made from a house in Dehradun where Rahul lived with his mother Shabnam. Maria, who was deeply involved with the case, having questioned Indrani for long hours, said this clearly proved that Sheena had not moved to the US – a claim that Indrani had made to several people.

Discrepancies in the Case

• Maria said that Sheena’s passport was recovered from Dehradun on 28 Aug 2015.
  
• Witness statements show that Rahul Mukerjea handed over two of Sheena’s passports on 24 September 2015.
  
• The same witnesses said Rahul gave his Nokia handset to the police on 24 September 2015.
  
• Was no panchnama done in Dehradun? Or was it a sleight of hand on Maria’s part?
  
• Joint Commissioner (Law and Order) Deven Bharti claimed he was only acquainted with the Mukerjeas.
  
• He claims he first met the couple when he was with the FRRO in Mumbai.
  
• Bharti claimed Peter and Indrani sought his help to locate a relative’s phone after the murder.
  
• Indrani’s CDR suggests she kept in touch with Bharti long after the murder.
  

Maria’s Claim on Sheena’s Passport

The charismatic commissioner also claimed that the “second accused” in the murder case, Indrani’s Kolkata-based former husband Sanjeev Khanna, had “confessed” to his role in the crime.

We have also recovered Sheena Bora’s passport from Dehradun today (28 August 2015). This would negate the theory that Sheena Bora went to the US. We have just interrogated the third accused (Khanna) and he has confessed to his complicity in the crime.

<b>Rakesh Maria, Former Mumbai Police Commissioner</b>

And yet the panchnama, prepared on the day the passport was recovered in the presence of witnesses, finds no mention in the CBI’s list of documents linked to the murder. It wasn’t annexed to the chargesheet filed by the central agency in November against Indrani, Khanna and Indrani’s driver Shyamwar Rai.

Former Mumbai police commissioner Rakesh Maria. (Photo: PTI)

Deven Bharti’s Association With the Mukerjeas

It also seems that Mumbai Police Joint Commissioner (Law and Order) Deven Bharti has concealed his long association with the Mukerjeas.

In his statement to the CBI, he sought to downplay his links with the Mukerjea couple, but Indrani’s call data record shows that she spoke with Bharti 11 times on 28 April 2012, four days after Sheena’s murder. At that time, Indrani was in Goa with Peter.

(Photo: Rahul Gupta/ The Quint)

Sheena’s Passport in Sealed Packet

Interestingly, while all other documents, running into several hundred pages, were annexed to the CBI chargesheet and are therefore publicly available, Sheena’s passport was submitted in a “sealed packet”.

The passport is as much a piece of evidence as the forensics department’s documents, or Sheena’s bank details. Why such secrecy over the passport? Was the passport put in a sealed packet by the Mumbai Police or the CBI?

While the Mumbai Police officers involved in investigating the case refused to comment, it is likely that Rahul Mukerjea’s Nokia cellphone, as well as audio clips of his conversations with his father Peter and Indrani, which he had recorded as part of his quest to find answers to Sheena’s disappearance, were recovered by the cops from Dehradun on 28 August 2015.

Yet again, there is no original panchnama document detailing the date on which Rahul’s phone was seized in Dehradun. But it finds mention in the list of documents the CBI annexed with its chargesheet and is dated 24 September 2015. The place where the witness statements were recorded is Mumbai.

Witness on Sheena’s Two Passports

A closer examination of Mumbai Police records show that two witnesses testified to the recovery of two passports in Sheena’s name, not in Dehradun, but in Mumbai. What is intriguing is that the statements of the two witnesses, Rohan Subhash Rai and Sushil Pandey, both from Santa Cruz, Mumbai, were made in the presence of police inspector NR Alakhnure on 24 September 2015, and NOT 28 August 2015 as claimed by Maria in front of television cameras. The former Mumbai Police Commissioner has a lot of explaining to do.

(Photo: The Quint)

The statements said that following items/articles were “produced by Rahul Mukerjea to Shri NR Alakhnure in our presence which was taken over by said PI (police inspector) Alakhnure:

• Two passports of Sheena Bora
  
• Mobile set of Rahul Mukerjea of Nokia make”
  
• 
  

What prompted Maria to declare the seizure of the “passport” (although two were recovered) from Dehradun, when the witness statements clearly show they were handed over by Rahul to the police almost a month later in Mumbai?

Why were Sheena’s passports in a sealed pack? (Photo: The Quint)

Maria on Skeletal Remains

Likewise, on 28 August 2015, in the same brief declaration before the press, Maria said that “this morning we have recovered the skeletal remains of the deceased Sheena Bora…”

How did Maria know for sure that the remains were Sheena’s, especially when DNA tests were yet to be conducted? Shyamwar Rai may have, after his arrest, shown the police the spot where Sheena’s body was burnt, but that is not sufficient proof to claim that the skeletal remains were her’s.

Sheena Bora’s murder was being vigorously pursued by Maria, Deven Bharti and Additional Commissioner (Western Region) Chhering Dorje who formed the core of the team of senior officers overseeing the probe at that time.

Junior officers like Assistant Commissioner Sanjay Kadam and Inspector Dinesh Kadam, who was the investigating officer of the murder case, and others actually investigated various angles and gathered evidence.

Bharti’s Concealment

In his statement to the CBI, which is in the possession of The Quint, Deven Bharti said:

Peter Mukerjea and his wife Indrani Mukerjea are acquainted with me since I was working in FRRO (Foreigners Regional Registration Office), Mumbai. He along with his wife had visited and met me in my office in connection with extension of their PIO card etc.

(Photo: The Quint)

Bharti said that while posted in the Crime Branch in 2012 Peter and Indrani “contacted me… to find out the latest location of one mobile phone belonging to one of their relative.” These phone conversations took place after 24 April 2012, the day Sheena was murdered.

While Bharti tried to pass off his relationship with the Mukerjeas as mere acquaintance, other evidence, such as Indrani’s CDR show that there were frequent and long phone conversations between the officer and her. The Quint has accessed some parts of the CDR. Before Sheena’s murder, on 6 April 2012, Indrani called Bharti at 9:09 am, and the two spoke for 140 seconds.

(Photo: Rahul Gupta/ The Quint)

Calls Long After the Murder

He remained in touch with Indrani after Sheena’s murder. On 17 July 2012, Indrani called him at 9.35 am when she was in Spain. The call lasted 79 seconds. Bharti has some explaining to do about why he did not withdraw himself from the case and the interrogation sessions, especially when he knew the Mukerjeas far better than he claimed. What is noteworthy is that though the CBI is fully aware of Bharti’s long association with the Mukerjeas, it has chosen to go soft on him.