Sheena Bora murder: CBI stumped by basic errors made by Mumbai cops
While CBI nailed Peter Mukerjea based on the number of calls he made to Indrani on the day of the murder -- by scrutinising his Call Detail Record, Mumbai cops missed this crucial piece of evidence completely
A day after the CBI arrested Peter Mukerjea for his involvement in the sensational Sheena Bora murder case, questions are now being raised by CBI officers about the shoddy investigation by the Mumbai police.
A few CBI officers even claimed that the Mumbai police forgot the basics of investigation.
Though the Khar police arrested Indrani Mukerjea, her former husband Sanjeev Khanna and driver Shyam Rai on August 24, 2015, and questioned Peter for the next 15 days, they never managed to collect a single evidence to arrest him.
On the other hand, CBI nailed Peter using a basic piece of evidence — his Call Detail Record (CDR).
CBI sources said they were stunned at the basic errors made by the Mumbai police, especially when the then police commissioner Rakesh Maria failed to scrutinise Peter’s call records.
Maria and Assistant Commissioner of Police Sanjay Kadam, who initially investigated the case, remained unavailable for comments.
Representing the central probe agency, Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh told the CBI Special Court Magistrate R V Adone: “We have evidence which points that Peter was well informed of Sheena Bora’s murder. He called Indrani on the date of murder of April 23 as well as on April 24, 2012, several times from London. The frequency of the calls made to his wife was so high, as if he was taking updates of the murder. We have also audio recordings between Peter and his son Rahul, wherein Peter is telling Rahul that he has spoken to Sheena and that she his happily settled in the US. This conversation happened after Sheena’s murder.”
CBI officials claimed Peter was lying to Rahul despite knowing the fact that Sheena was dead. He was desperately trying to convince his son that Sheena had happily settled in the US and that he should no longer pursue her.
“While Indrani returned from London on April 22 and executed the murder, Peter returned after the murder, on April 26. They immediately left for Goa and on May 1 they flew to London. This also points out Peter’s role in the crime as he was always with Indrani — before and after the murder,” Singh informed the court.
Commenting on the case, former IPS officer-turned-lawyer Y P Singh also questioned the role of officials from Khar police station. When informed about the evidence CBI used to nail Peter, he said, “This is a serious issue. How did the police miss it? Even though they [Khar police] only suspected Peter's involvement in the crime, they should have taken him into custody on the basis of suspicion.”