Thursday, Apr 25, 2024 | Last Update : 06:41 PM IST

  Metros   Mumbai  24 Dec 2016  Murder case against Indrani baseless: lawyer

Murder case against Indrani baseless: lawyer

THE ASIAN AGE.
Published : Dec 24, 2016, 3:07 am IST
Updated : Dec 24, 2016, 6:53 am IST

He also emphasised that the section 468 is not applicable in this case because the case is not of cheating.

Indrani’s lawyer argued the statement of Mekhail Bora, Indrani’s son, was recorded after the registration of FIR, but section 307 of IPC was already part of the FIR.
 Indrani’s lawyer argued the statement of Mekhail Bora, Indrani’s son, was recorded after the registration of FIR, but section 307 of IPC was already part of the FIR.

Mumbai: Indrani Mukerjea’s lawyer has argued that she cannot be charged for an attempt to murder (for trying to kill her son Mekhail). Indrani shouldn’t be charged ‘alone’ for forgery also because her secretary Kajal Sharma in her statement has confessed that she had forged Sheena’s signature on Indrani’s instructions, said her lawyer.

Advocate Sudeep Pasbola argued before the special CBI judge H.S. Mahajan that, statement of Mekhail Bora, Indrani’s biological son, was recorded after the registration of FIR, but section 307 (attempt to murder) of IPC was already a part of the FIR. “The police came to know about the incident only after Mekhail recorded his statement, then on what basis was the section 307 registered?” asked advocate Pasbola.

He also emphasised that the section 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating) is not applicable in this case because the case is not of cheating. According to him, the prosecution’s case is that, in spite of knowing the reason behind forging Kajal Sharma still followed Indrani’s order. The lawyer argued that an accused cannot conspire with a witness but with accused however, in this case the prosecution has made Sharma a witness despite the fact that she aided and abetted in the alleged crime.

As per the prosecution after Sheena’s murder, Indrani had sent Kajal Sharma with Sheena’s resignation to Reliance’s Mumbai Metro office, where Sheena was working before her demise. Sharma told the CBI that she had refused to forge Sheena’s signature in the resignation letter but was forced by her boss, Indrani. Indrani’s lawyer is claiming that alone Indrani cannot be charged for forgery because her secretary also played an important role.

The CBI has also made claims that, Indrani wanted to kill her son Mekhail along with Sheena and Mekhail was called to Mumbai and was given a lot of liquor but it did not affect him and hence her former husband and co-accused Sanjeev Khanna advised her to leave Mekhail since it would have been difficult for them to carry two dead bodies at different places. The CBI court, which is hearing arguments on framing of charges on accused, deferred hearing till January 4.

Charges on Indrani:

  • 120-B (conspiracy) r/w Section 364 (kidnapping or abducting in order to murder)
  • 302 (Murder)
  • 328 (Causing hurt by means of poison, etc)
  • 201 (Causing disappearance of evidence of offence)
  • 203 (Giving false information respecting an offence committed)
  • 307 (Attempt to murder)
  • 420 (Cheating)
  • 468 (Forgery for purpose of cheating)
  • 471 (Using as genuine a forged document)

Tags: indrani mukerjea, cbi, sheena bora murder case, mekhail bora
Location: India, Maharashtra, Mumbai (Bombay)