CLAIMING THAT wife Indrani Mukerjea is trying to play the “victim card”, Peter Mukerjea has said her allegation of his involvement in Sheena Bora’s abduction was a “figment of imagination”.
On November 15, Indrani filed an application before court, seeking Call Data Records (CDR) of Peter claiming he may have conspired and abducted Sheena and manipulated circumstances to frame her in the murder case. On Thursday, Peter filed his reply to the application, stating that providing the CDR is well within the discretion of the court and that it may pass appropriate orders.
Peter said Indrani filed the application to malign his reputation and cause serious prejudice to him. “The conduct of accused number 1 (Indrani) is highly condemnable, contemptuous and is clearly an attempt to cause interference in the administration of justice… It appears that it is a desperate attempt of A1 to wriggle out of the situation thereby trying to play the ‘victim’ card,” states Peter’s reply filed through advocate Shrikant Shivade.
He further said he did not wish to engage in such “mudslinging” and calls the allegations “irrelevant” to the prayer calling for his CDR. “The accused is not aware whether making of such false allegations is her well-thought legal strategy or not. However, the accused suspects a sinister plot to drag the accused in the controversy,” the reply states.
The CBI, also in its reply filed to Indrani’s application, has said she was delaying the trial. “The said application has been filed by accused Indrani Mukerjea with a malafide and dishonest intention to divert/twist the attention and concentration of approver Shyamvar Rai, whose cross-examination is continuing…and is now at a crucial stage,” the CBI said.
On Thursday, Special Judge J C Jagdale questioned Indrani’s advocates on whether the application made by Indrani was inculpatory (evidence that can establish guilt) and whether it was made under Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act for consideration of proved confession, which would affect the person making it and others jointly under trial for the same offence. Advocate Sudeep Pasbola, representing Indrani, said the application was not a confessional statement but about seeking CDR.