The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has called the claim of prime accused Indrani Mukerjea in Sheena Bora murder case, that Sheena is alive as ‘cooked up’ and ‘imaginary’ in a response filed last month before the court.
Indrani had claimed in her application that a jail inmate of hers, police inspector Asha Korke (arrested in an extortion case) had informed her that she had met and spoken with Sheena at Srinagar’s Dal Lake while on a vacation there. The CBI called this claim ‘imaginary’, ‘made up’ and denied it. It said these are ‘cooked up’ either by Indrani or by Korke and a figment of either of their imaginations.
The agency called it ‘next to impossible’ that when Sheena was murdered by strangulating to death, that she is alive, living somewhere in Kashmir and that she had a conversation with Korke. It also called her claims ‘wild’ which amount to a mockery of justice. It also said that it is an attempt to supplement her bogus and imaginary defence and has nothing to do with reality.
The application is filed with the intention to delay the disposal of the trial, it said further. It also cited the testimony of accused-turned-approver and Indrani’s driver Shyamvar Rai and said she has a prime role in committing the murder of her own daughter by strangulating her and setting the dead body on fire.
The agency also cited the matching of scientific evidence in the form of DNA matches between the remains of the dead body and that of Indrani. It said that its investigation clearly established that Sheena Bora is dead. CFSL reports in respect of DNA examination of the femur bone and cervical vertebrae of the recovered dead body have concluded that Indrani Mukerjea is the biological mother of the DNA of the femur bone and cervical vertebrae, it stated.
It further pointed out that the contents of the application before the court are totally improvised as compared to the letter Indrani had written to its director. It said that in that letter Sheena’s purported conversation with Korke is not mentioned.
"This clearly shows that the applicant is cooking up stories to benefit herself by misleading the CBI as well as this Honourable Court,” its response stated.
