7/25/2019 teradata_amp.pdf

1/1

* THE TIMES OF INDIA, NEWDELHIMONDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 201512 TIMES NATION

Swati.Deshpande

@timesgroup.com

Mumbai: Merely sayingthere were several calls eachof a long duration over 20minutes between PeterMukerjea and wife Indranijust before, during and af-ter Sheena Bora was killedon April 24, 2012, while he wasstill abroad, in the UK, maynot be sufficient to infer thathe conspired with her for themurder, unless the contentsof the conversation or anyother evidence, even circum-stantial, of his direct involve-ment exists, legal experts say.

The Central Bureau of In-vestigation (CBI), which washanded over the investigationinto the brutal murder lessthan a month after former topcop Rakesh Maria booked andarrested Indrani, arrested the60-year-old media honcho onThursday for his involve-ment in the criminal conspir-

acy with his wife Indrani (al-ready arrested). His arreston the day the CBI filed itschargesheet against his wifeIndrani and two others, haselicited much debate on thereasons for the arrest.

A chargesheet signifiesthat the probe has concludedand the agency has found ade-quate evidence for the courtto try the accused.

But the law allows the in-vestigation to continue andeffect further arrests and theCBI did just that. But there iscuriosity about the role thatthe CBI is now accusing Peterof. The IPC sections invokedagainst him 302 (murder),120B (criminal conspiracy tocommit murder) and 201 (de-struction of evidence) are

tentative at this stage, asadvocate Shrikant Bhat said,adding, and ultimately afterinvestigation, the CBI may ormay not continue to includeeven the harsh murdercharge in a supplementarychargesheet against him.

The law on criminal con-spiracy requires there is anagreement and intent be-tween participants to committhe offence.

A line of judgements holdthat a conspiracy ends whenits object is achieved.

The conspiracy can be justof murder or to murder anddestroy all evidence of it,which then becomes a contin-uing conspiracy till the de-struction is complete, whichis perhaps what the CBI issuggesting, s aid a lawyer.

The CBI showed it meansbusiness on Thursday bybringing in the Central gov-

ernments topmost law offi-cer in the state, additional so-licitor-general Anil Singh, tosecure Peters remand beforea magistrate, which itselfsurprised many in legal cir-cles. Singh emphasised onphone calls, Peters misin-

formation to Rahul aboutSheena being alive in the USand his personal knowl-edge about Sheenas phoneand ATM card, which Singhaccused him of possibly con-cealing to avoid detection ofthe offence.

But Peters lawyer Niran-jan Mundargi, and now oth-ers, are questioning whethera conspiracy and murdercase can be slapped on him onthis basis alone.

Singh had said these callswere more frequent than usu-al between the two when In-drani left UK on April 23, 2012.But lawyers wonder if it issufficient, without knowingthe contents, to draw an infer-ence of conspiracy, especiallywhen the calls are between ahusband and wife.

The CBI chargesheet already says Indrani conspiredwith her ex-husband SanjeevKhanna and driver to murderher daughter Sheena andhide her body.

Now the CBI says Peterwas also involved in the con-

spiracy with Indrani.While itis true that in law, in a con-spiracy, every participan tneed not know the other par-ticipants of such a conspir-acy, there needs to be a director strong circumstantial evi-dence to make the conspiracycharge stick.

Bhat said a remand appli-cation is not duty bound todisclose to the court all thefacts or its entire case, but on-ly facts essential to get custo-dy of the accused. However,others said the plea needs toshow the prima facie basis ofthe involvement to justify re-quest for custody .

The CBIs remand appli-cation said continuous andsustained custodial interro-gation of Peter is required torecover Sheenas articles in-

cluding will.The CBI admitted that he

was not in India on the day ofthe murder but had returnedon April 26. The CBI is alleg-ing conspiracy by him evenafter the crime.

In Indian law, an accesso-

ry after the fact after thecrime is not recognized. Al-legations of conspiracy to cover up evidence of Sheenasdeath would come under IPCsection 201, or the charge ofdestroying evidence to shieldan offender in a crime one hasnot committed.

The Supreme Court in2003 has held that an offenceunder section 201 requiresintention to screen the of-fender as the sole objective.

The fact that such con-cealment was likely to havethat effect is not enough, theSC had held in a case where awomans acquittal in her sis-ter-in-laws murder was up-held and her conviction un-der section 201set aside.

The CBI wants to interro-gate him for financial trans-

actions. Lawyers ask why hiscustody is required when po-lice had questioned him forthree straight days and he hascooperated. Advocate ManojTaneja said that a person hasthe right not to implicate him-self under the law.

Proof Of Intent

& Agreement In

Crime Crucial

Experts debate conspiracyto kill based on calls to wife

Rohit.Khanna@timesgroup.com

Kolkata/Mumbai: Was Pe-

ter Mukerjea trying to disso-ciate himself from his wifeIndrani when he was arrest-ed by the CBI?

In what could be an indica-tion of this, more than a monthbefore he was arrested in theSheena Bora murder case, Pe-ter had started the process ofchanging the nominees for oneof the four high-value life in-surance policies he had boughtfrom two private insurers inKolkata in 2003 from IndraniMukerjea and Vidhie to histwo sons Rahul and Rabin.

He had also asked for achange of the bank accountdetails for receiving moneyfrom two policies he heldwith another insurer butstopped the process later.

One policy from one insurerwas in Peters name and the oth-er in Indranis; both the policiesfrom the second insurer were inPeters name. Peter used to pay

the premiums from his accountin the Nariman Point branch anationalised bank.

The first policy that Peterheld had a money-back optionthat allowed Indrani to receive

an annual amount in a joint ac-count she had with Peter in aMumbai-based private bank.

Sources said Peter called upthe branch of the insurancecompany in Kolkata in Septem-ber and asked that the nomi-nees of the policy in his namebe changed from Indrani andVidhie, Indrani Mukerjeasdaughter from Sanjeev Khan-na, to his sons Rabin and Rahul.

The insurance companyagreed, sources said, and askedhim to submit an applicationfor the purpose. However, thesources said the process ofchanging the nominees was de-layed due some faulty paper-work.CBI officials probing thefinancial angle in the murder

case are ascertaining if themoney received from the poli-cies was diverted to any ac-count where Indrani was theprimary account holder.

When contacted, Peters

ments by the companies earlierowned by Peter and Indrani arealso being probed by the CBI.(Inputs from Swati Deshpande)

lawyer Niranjan Mundargi onSunday said he was not yetaware about any insurance Pe-ter had bought. Other invest-

Mth before arrest, Peter soughtto change insurance nominees

BODY OFEVIDENCE?

PETER MUKERJEA | 60Arrested by CBI on

November 19 in connection

with the Sheena Bora

murder case

CHARGESMurder

SECTION 302, IPC

Max punishment | Death

Criminal Conspiracy

SECTION 120B, IPC

Destruction ofevidence, giving falseinformation to shield

an offender

SECTION 201 IPC

Max punishment|

7 years

Kidnapping to

murderSECTION 364

Max punishment|10 years, fine

CBI wants to interrogate Peter to unearththe larger conspiracy and his role

CBI said Peter tried to mislead hisson Rahul by informing him that Sheena

was in the US and was alive

Peter admitted he said he hadspoken with Sheena on phoneafter her killing by the prime

accused

Peter and Indrani

communicated frequently and

for long durations on the phone

just before, during and after the

killing of Sheena, after Indrani

left the UK for Mumbai on April 23,

2012, a day before Sheenas murder

WHAT NEXTPeter will be interrogated

in CBI lock-up

He will be produced on

November 23 before the

magistrate for further

remand which his lawyer

can oppose and

seek bail

CASE IN CBIS REMAND APPLICATION

The CBI has had custody of Peter Mukerjea for three days. What the agency will say in its nextremand application while producing the former TV tycoon in the Esplanade court at 3pm on

Monday is eagerly anticipated. The CBI will once again have additional solicitor general Anil Singhappear before the magistrate. Peter will have lawyer Niranjan Mundargi and perhaps his seniorAshok Mundargi represent him. Singh said the CBI wants to question him on financial transactionsand his custody is essential since he h as businesses and homes in India and abroad.

The CBI on Sunday questioned Peters son Rahul, who has handed over several documentsallegedly used by Sheena Bora to blackmail her mother Indrani Mukerjea. Investigators saySheena, who was engaged to Rahul, had threatened Indrani that if she did not give her a 3BHK flat inthe city, she would tell people she was her daughter and not sister, as claimed. The defence lawyers

did not make any request over the weekend to see him while he was in the CBIs custody and have await-and-watch strategy to see what the remand application says. Swati Deshpande

CBI wants to quiz Mukerjea on his financial dealings

LIKE THAT ONLY JUG SURAIYA & AJIT NINAN

Mahapatra told TOI,Its a personal de-cision. I thought

for a long time but some in-cidents hurt me so muchthat I decided to return theaward. Everyday some-

thing or the other is comingout in newspapers. You can-not eat this, you cannot eatthat. It hurts me.

Before him, Punjabi writ-er Dalip Kaur Tiwana andKannada litterateur Deva-nuru Mahadeva had return-ed their Padma Shri for thesame reasons. Scientist PMBhargava had returned hisPadma Bhushan last month.

Mahapatra received thePadma Shri in 2009 for hiscontribution to literature.In 1981, he became the firstIndian poet writing in En-glish to win the SahityaAkademi award.

More than 40 writers havereturned their Sahitya Aka-demi awards or quit theirposts in the top literary bodyon similar grounds. At least12 filmmakers, including Di-bakar Banerjee, KundanShah and Anand Patward-

han, returned their nationalawards last month to protestagainst rising intolerance.

I have nothing to dowith those who returnedSahitya Akademi awards. Idid not even speak to them.Its a small voice and maynot solve the problem, Ma-hapatra said.

He is the first litterateurfrom Odisha to join the bri-gade of luminaries fromdifferent fields to returnawards to the government.

Jnanpith Award winnerPratibha Ray said, Writersshould express their an-guish through their writ-ings. Returning awards isnot a solution to any prob-lem. I am a rebel and I wantto express that in my words.

Mahapatra

1st litterateur

from Odisha to

return award

Similarly, importers,who bring in items onwhich the custom du-

ty is high, undervalue theimports in order to savecustom duty, and they re-

quire foreign exchange inthe country of origin to paythe difference, it added.

The imports of dryfruits, pulses and rice wereshown to be done in these 59companies having ac-counts in BoB. No actualimports took place.

The probe found that Rs6,172 crore was deposited inthese 59 accounts betweenAugust 2014 till August thisyear, mostly in the for m offorex remittances andtransfer through otherbanks. The suspects usedanother set of persons inthe transfers.

Officials said that entryoperators in Old Delhi ar-ea, mainly in ChandniChowk, were approached

by the exporters/impor-ters to transfer cash inthese 59 current accounts.

These entry operators,investigators say, usuallyhave various bank ac-counts for absorbing blackmoney of several business-

men. The entry operatorsprovide fake purchase in-voices three to four timesthe actual value of theitems. Once they are paidcash through differentchannels on commissionbasis, these operators putthat money in several bankaccounts owned by them.The money was then trans-ferred to the BoB accountsin smaller amountsthrough different banks.

CBI and ED officialssaid that they are trying toidentify all the players inthe scam and many personsare being questioned. Anofficer termed it the case ofturning black money intowhite through bankinghawala channels.

Continued from P1

Entry operatorshave various bankaccounts: Officials

In the third major anti-Nax-alite operation this month,

Chhattisgarh police on Sun-day gunned down four wom-en guerrillas after raidingtheir Aranpur camp, border-ing Dantewada and Sukmadistricts of Bastar division.

With assistance of a sur-rendered Maoist, a joint op-eration was conducted by

district reserve guards(DRG), special task force andCentral Reserve Police Forceearly on Sun day.

There were nearly 8-10Maoists camping in Malan-gir area. Maoist casualtiesmay be much higher as re-bels managed to flee withbodies of their slain com-rades, SP Kashyap said. TNN

4 women Naxals gunned down

Rahul Mukerjea. For Alivesteps, see P2

Continued from P1

Ahmed. Ali@timesgroup.com

Mumbai: Peter Mukerjea

has told CBI officials that im-mediately after his son Rahulraised questions about Shee-na Boras disappearance, hehad met a senior IPS officer atthe state director-general ofpolices office on May 2012,about a month after his step-daughter was murdered.

The officer had told him toapproach the local police. It isnot known if Peter did that asno written complaint was fil-ed with any police station.

Mumbai police sourcessaid Peter had made the claimwhen questioned on Septem-ber 6, when the Khar policewere investigating the case fol-lowing instructions from thencity police chief Rakesh Maria.

We dont know if Peter istelling the truth as there is nowritten application. Petermay be bluffing to defendhimself, an officer said.

Rahul, Peters son from his

first marriage, had ap-

proached the Worli, MIDC andKhar police with missing per-sons complaints soon after

Sheenas disappearance, butthey were not taken forwardby the local police. Sourcessaid an officer had gone withRahul to Indranis Marlowresidence in Worli, but Indra-ni convinced him that Sheenahad moved to the US.

If Peters claim is true,why did the IPS officer nothelp Peter take the complaintforward or guide him to file amissing persons complaint?

Three police officers arefacing investigation over notfiling an FIR over the disposalof Sheenas half-burnt body,about a month after she wasmurdered.

A Khar police officer saidMarias promotion and trans-fer as DGP (home guards) hadcreated an atmosphere offear in the probe team and sothey did not question PeterMukerjea after that.

For the full report, log on to

www.timesofindia.com

I met top IPS officerafter Rahul revelation

Pranav.Chaudhary

@timesgroup.com

Patna: Each time Nitish Ku-mar becomes CM of Bihar, Je-hanabad native Anil Sharma,53, expresses his happiness ina macabre way by choppingoff a finger. He cut one up onFriday when Nitish took oath

of office for a fifth term. A res-ident of Oina village in Jeha-nabad district, about 53kmfrom Patna, Sharma made avain bid to meet Nitish in thestate capital on Sunday.

On November 20, around2.34pm, I chopped off my leftlittle finger with my sickle,he told TOI over phone. Thefinger was immersed in theGanga after offering it to thedeity in my village.

Till now, Sharma haschopped off three of his fin-gers. He had earlier sacri-ficed one finger each of hisleft hand in 2005 and in 2010,and offered them to the villagedeity. I want to sell one of myJersey cows to organise a feastin the village to celebrate Nit-ishs grand victory, he said.

This time too he

cuts his finger

over Nitish win

Wanted Sons ToReplace Indrani,Vidhie In Docus