A special court in Mumbai on Monday directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Khar police to produce a laptop belonging to Sheena Bora, along with its forensic reports and seizure records. The court ruled that the device is material for a fair trial. The order came after accused Indrani Mukerjea filed a plea seeking production of the electronic device, which had been listed among 'unrelied' articles lying in the agency's storage. The device, described as a metallic grey Compaq Presario, was identified by Sheena's fiance Rahul Mukerjea as belonging to the victim.
Court's Rationale
Special judge JP Darekar stated, 'In the interest of justice, production of unrelied article mentioned… of the Unrelied list of articles and its consequential documents such as seizure panchanama, names of panch witnesses, correspondence FSL and its analysis report are required to be produced on record.' While the prosecution argued that the laptop was not relevant to the case after forensic evaluation, the court noted that the description of the article indicated it had been sealed in the presence of witnesses under the procedure contemplated by the Code of Criminal Procedure. Despite this, the specific search and seizure panchanama and the names of the panch witnesses were missing from both the relied and unrelied document lists provided to the defence.
Importance for Trial
The judge observed that the ongoing trial involves complex electronic evidence and that the defence requires these specific records to conduct an effective cross-examination. The judge noted that the laptop and its corresponding analysis are necessary for a 'fair trial on merits.' During the proceedings, the prosecution contended that the application was a move to delay the trial, which is currently being conducted on a day-to-day basis, and noted that the witness currently under cross-examination was not involved in the seizure of the laptop. The judge, however, said 'it is necessary that the said document in respect of the laptop must be produced on record without which further cross-examination of witness cannot be conducted effectively and it will cause great prejudice to the accused.'
Further Directions
The judge further noted the lack of clarity regarding when the seizure took place and whether it occurred during the initial probe by the Khar police or the subsequent investigation by the central agency. The judge also directed the authorities to submit any documents pertaining to the handing over of the device between the local police and the CBI.
Case Background
According to the CBI, Indrani, her former husbands Sanjeev Khanna and Peter Mukerjea, who was still married to her in 2015, and their driver Shyamvar Rai hatched a plan to abduct and murder her daughter Sheena and attempted to murder her son Mekhail Bora. It said on April 24, 2012, Indrani, Khanna and Rai abducted Sheena in a car, gave her sedatives, strangled her, and disposed of the body in a forest in Pen in Raigad district. The alleged crime came to light in August 2015, after Rai's arrest in another case. He later turned approver. All accused are out on bail. So far, over 140 witnesses have deposed.
