TIMES NATION

12

* THE TIMES OF INDIA, NEW DELHI

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 2015

Experts debate conspiracy Mth before arrest, Peter sought

to kill based on calls to wife to change insurance nominees
Proof Of Intent
& Agreement In
Crime Crucial
Swati.Deshpande
@timesgroup.com

Mumbai: Merely saying

there were several calls each
of a long duration over 20
minutes between Peter
Mukerjea and wife Indrani
just before, during and after Sheena Bora was killed
on April 24, 2012, while he was
still abroad, in the UK, may
not be sufficient to infer that
he conspired with her for the
murder, unless the contents
of the conversation or any
other evidence, even circumstantial, of his direct involvement exists, legal experts say.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which was
handed over the investigation
into the brutal murder less
than a month after former top
cop Rakesh Maria booked and
arrested Indrani, arrested the
60-year-old media honcho on
Thursday for his involvement in the criminal conspiracy with his wife Indrani (already arrested). His arrest
on the day the CBI filed its
chargesheet against his wife
Indrani and two others, has
elicited much debate on the
reasons for the arrest.

PETER MUKERJEA | 60
Arrested by CBI on
November 19 in connection
with the Sheena Bora
murder case

BODY OF
EVIDENCE?
CHARGES

CASE IN CBIS REMAND APPLICATION

Murder
SECTION 302, IPC
Max punishment | Death

CBI wants to interrogate Peter to unearth

the larger conspiracy and his role

Criminal Conspiracy
SECTION 120B, IPC
Destruction of
evidence, giving false
information to shield
an offender
SECTION 201 IPC
Max punishment |
7 years
Kidnapping to
murder
SECTION 364

A chargesheet signifies
that the probe has concluded
and the agency has found adequate evidence for the court
to try the accused.
But the law allows the investigation to continue and
effect further arrests and the
CBI did just that. But there is
curiosity about the role that
the CBI is now accusing Peter
of. The IPC sections invoked
against him 302 (murder),
120B (criminal conspiracy to
commit murder) and 201 (destruction of evidence) are
tentative at this stage, as
advocate Shrikant Bhat said,
adding, and ultimately after
investigation, the CBI may or
may not continue to include
even the harsh murder
charge in a supplementary
chargesheet against him.
The law on criminal conspiracy requires there is an
agreement and intent between participants to commit
the offence.
A line of judgements hold
that a conspiracy ends when
its object is achieved.
The conspiracy can be just
of murder or to murder and
destroy all evidence of it,
which then becomes a continuing conspiracy till the destruction is complete, which
is perhaps what the CBI is
suggesting, said a lawyer.
The CBI showed it means
business on Thursday by
bringing in the Central governments topmost law officer in the state, additional solicitor-general Anil Singh, to
secure Peters remand before
a magistrate, which itself
surprised many in legal circles. Singh emphasised on
phone calls, Peters misin-

I met top IPS officer

after Rahul revelation

Wanted Sons To
Replace Indrani,
Vidhie In Docus

Max punishment |

CBI said Peter tried to mislead his

son Rahul by informing him that Sheena
was in the US and was alive

WHAT NEXT

Peter 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

10 years, ne

seek bail

Peter admitted he said he had

spoken with Sheena on phone
after 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

CBI wants to quiz Mukerjea on his financial dealings

Rohit.Khanna@timesgroup.com

Ahmed. Ali@timesgroup.com

Kolkata/Mumbai: Was Peter Mukerjea trying to dissociate himself from his wife
Indrani when he was arrested by the CBI?
In what could be an indication of this, more than a month
before he was arrested in the
Sheena Bora murder case, Peter had started the process of
changing the nominees for one
of the four high-value life insurance policies he had bought
from two private insurers in
Kolkata in 2003 from Indrani
Mukerjea and Vidhie to his
two sons Rahul and Rabin.
He had also asked for a
change of the bank account
details for receiving money
from two policies he held
with another insurer but
stopped the process later.
One policy from one insurer
was in Peters name and the other in Indranis; both the policies
from the second insurer were in
Peters name. Peter used to pay
the premiums from his account
in the Nariman Point branch a
nationalised bank.
The first policy that Peter
held had a money-back option
that allowed Indrani to receive

Mumbai: Peter Mukerjea

has told CBI officials that immediately after his son Rahul
raised questions about Sheena Boras disappearance, he
had met a senior IPS officer at
the state director-general of
polices office on May 2012,
about a month after his stepdaughter was murdered.
The officer had told him to
approach the local police. It is
not known if Peter did that as
no written complaint was filed with any police station.
Mumbai police sources
said Peter had made the claim
when questioned on September 6, when the Khar police
were investigating the case following instructions from then
city police chief Rakesh Maria.
We dont know if Peter is
telling the truth as there is no
written application. Peter
may be bluffing to defend
himself, an officer said.
Rahul, Peters son from his
first marriage, had ap-

proached the Worli, MIDC and

Khar police with missing persons complaints soon after
Sheenas disappearance, but
they were not taken forward
by the local police. Sources
said an officer had gone with
Rahul to Indranis Marlow
residence in Worli, but Indrani convinced him that Sheena
had moved to the US.
If Peters claim is true,
why did the IPS officer not
help Peter take the complaint
forward or guide him to file a
missing persons complaint?
Three police officers are
facing investigation over not
filing an FIR over the disposal
of Sheenas half-burnt body,
about a month after she was
murdered.
A Khar police officer said
Marias promotion and transfer as DGP (home guards) had
created an atmosphere of
fear in the probe team and so
they did not question Peter
Mukerjea after that.
For the full report, log on to
www.timesofindia.com

lawyer Niranjan Mundargi on

Sunday said he was not yet
aware about any insurance Peter had bought. Other invest-

ments by the companies earlier

owned by Peter and Indrani are
also being probed by the CBI.
(Inputs from Swati Deshpande)

Mahapatra
1st litterateur
from Odisha to
return award

Rahul Mukerjea. For Alive

steps, see P2

an annual amount in a joint account she had with Peter in a

Mumbai-based private bank.
Sources said Peter called up
the branch of the insurance
company in Kolkata in September and asked that the nominees of the policy in his name
be changed from Indrani and
Vidhie, Indrani Mukerjeas
daughter from Sanjeev Khanna, to his sons Rabin and Rahul.
The insurance company
agreed, sources said, and asked
him to submit an application
for the purpose. However, the
sources said the process of
changing the nominees was delayed due some faulty paperwork. CBI officials probing the
financial angle in the murder
case are ascertaining if the
money received from the policies was diverted to any account where Indrani was the
primary account holder.
When contacted, Peters

LIKE THAT ONLY

JUG SURAIYA

&

AJIT NINAN

he CBI has had custody of Peter Mukerjea for three days. What the agency will say in its next

T remand 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 Singh
appear before the magistrate. Peter will have lawyer Niranjan Mundargi and perhaps his senior
Ashok Mundargi represent him. Singh said the CBI wants to question him on financial transactions
and his custody is essential since he has businesses and homes in India and abroad.
The CBI on Sunday questioned Peters son Rahul, who has handed over several documents
allegedly used by Sheena Bora to blackmail her mother Indrani Mukerjea. Investigators say
Sheena, who was engaged to Rahul, had threatened Indrani that if she did not give her a 3BHK flat in
the 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 a
wait-and-watch strategy to see what the remand application says.
Swati Deshpande

formation to Rahul about

Sheena being alive in the US
and his personal knowledge about Sheenas phone
and ATM card, which Singh
accused him of possibly concealing to avoid detection of
the offence.
But Peters lawyer Niranjan Mundargi, and now others, are questioning whether
a conspiracy and murder
case can be slapped on him on
this basis alone.
Singh had said these calls
were more frequent than usual between the two when Indrani left UK on April 23, 2012.
But lawyers wonder if it is
sufficient, without knowing
the contents, to draw an inference of conspiracy, especially
when the calls are between a
husband and wife.
The CBI chargesheet alre
ady says Indrani conspired
with her ex-husband Sanjeev
Khanna and driver to murder
her daughter Sheena and
hide her body.
Now the CBI says Peter
was also involved in the con-

spiracy with Indrani.While it

is true that in law, in a conspiracy, every participant
need not know the other participants of such a conspiracy, there needs to be a direct
or strong circumstantial evidence to make the conspiracy
charge stick.
Bhat said a remand application is not duty bound to
disclose to the court all the
facts or its entire case, but only facts essential to get custody of the accused. However,
others said the plea needs to
show the prima facie basis of
the involvement to justify request for custody .
The CBIs remand application said continuous and
sustained custodial interrogation of Peter is required to
recover Sheenas articles including will.
The CBI admitted that he
was not in India on the day of
the murder but had returned
on April 26. The CBI is alleging conspiracy by him even
after the crime.
In Indian law, an accesso-

ry after the fact after the

crime is not recognized. Allegations of conspiracy to co
ver up evidence of Sheenas
death would come under IPC
section 201, or the charge of
destroying evidence to shield
an offender in a crime one has
not committed.
The Supreme Court in
2003 has held that an offence
under section 201 requires
intention to screen the offender as the sole objective.
The fact that such concealment was likely to have
that effect is not enough, the
SC had held in a case where a
womans acquittal in her sister-in-laws murder was upheld and her conviction under section 201set aside.
The CBI wants to interrogate him for financial transactions. Lawyers ask why his
custody is required when police had questioned him for
three straight days and he has
cooperated. Advocate Manoj
Taneja said that a person has
the right not to implicate himself under the law.

Continued from P1

ahapatra told TOI,

Its a personal decision. I thought
for a long time but some incidents hurt me so much
that I decided to return the
award. Everyday something or the other is coming
out in newspapers. You cannot eat this, you cannot eat
that. It hurts me.
Before him, Punjabi writer Dalip Kaur Tiwana and
Kannada litterateur Devanuru Mahadeva had returned their Padma Shri for the
same reasons. Scientist PM
Bhargava had returned his
Padma Bhushan last month.
Mahapatra received the
Padma Shri in 2009 for his
contribution to literature.
In 1981, he became the first
Indian poet writing in English to win the Sahitya
Akademi award.
More than 40 writers have
returned their Sahitya Akademi awards or quit their
posts in the top literary body
on similar grounds. At least
12 filmmakers, including Dibakar Banerjee, Kundan
Shah and Anand Patwardhan, returned their national
awards last month to protest
against rising intolerance.
I have nothing to do
with those who returned
Sahitya Akademi awards. I
did not even speak to them.
Its a small voice and may
not solve the problem, Mahapatra said.
He is the first litterateur
from Odisha to join the brigade of luminaries from
different fields to return
awards to the government.
Jnanpith Award winner
Pratibha Ray said, Writers
should express their anguish through their writings. Returning awards is
not a solution to any problem. I am a rebel and I want
to express that in my words.

Entry operators
have various bank
accounts: Officials

Continued from P1

imilarly,
importers,
who bring in items on
which the custom duty is high, undervalue the
imports in order to save
custom duty, and they require foreign exchange in
the country of origin to pay
the difference, it added.
The imports of dry
fruits, pulses and rice were
shown to be done in these 59
companies
having
accounts in BoB. No actual
imports took place.
The probe found that Rs
6,172 crore was deposited in
these 59 accounts between
August 2014 till August this
year, mostly in the form of
forex remittances and
transfer through other
banks. The suspects used
another set of persons in
the transfers.
Officials said that entry
operators in Old Delhi area, mainly in Chandni
Chowk, were approached

by the exporters/importers to transfer cash in

these 59 current accounts.
These entry operators,
investigators say, usually
have various bank accounts for absorbing black
money of several businessmen. The entry operators
provide fake purchase invoices three to four times
the actual value of the
items. Once they are paid
cash through different
channels on commission
basis, these operators put
that money in several bank
accounts owned by them.
The money was then transferred to the BoB accounts
in
smaller
amounts
through different banks.
CBI and ED officials
said that they are trying to
identify all the players in
the scam and many persons
are being questioned. An
officer termed it the case of
turning black money into
white through banking
hawala channels.

This time too he

cuts his finger
over Nitish win
Pranav.Chaudhary
@timesgroup.com

Patna: Each time Nitish Kumar becomes CM of Bihar, Jehanabad native Anil Sharma,
53, expresses his happiness in
a macabre way by chopping
off a finger. He cut one up on
Friday when Nitish took oath
of office for a fifth term. A resident of Oina village in Jehanabad district, about 53km
from Patna, Sharma made a
vain bid to meet Nitish in the
state capital on Sunday.
On November 20, around
2.34pm, I chopped off my left
little finger with my sickle,
he told TOI over phone. The
finger was immersed in the
Ganga after offering it to the
deity in my village.
Till now, Sharma has
chopped off three of his fingers. He had earlier sacrificed one finger each of his
left hand in 2005 and in 2010,
and offered them to the village
deity. I want to sell one of my
Jersey cows to organise a feast
in the village to celebrate Nitishs grand victory, he said.

4 women Naxals gunned down

n the third major anti-Nax-

I alite operation this month,

Chhattisgarh police on Sunday gunned down four women guerrillas after raiding
their Aranpur camp, bordering Dantewada and Sukma
districts of Bastar division.
With assistance of a surrendered Maoist, a joint operation was conducted by

district
reserve
guards
(DRG), special task force and
Central Reserve Police Force
early on Sunday.
There were nearly 8-10
Maoists camping in Malangir area. Maoist casualties
may be much higher as rebels managed to flee with
bodies of their slain comrades, SP Kashyap said. TNN