Sheena Bora case: Prosecution confident that DNA report will suffice
According to Sheena Bora’s mother and the prime accused in the case, Indrani Mukerjea, no skeletal remains were ever discovered, and the evidence never existed
The prosecution in the alleged Sheena Bora murder case is confident that her remains going missing will not weaken their case as they have a DNA report that establishes their argument. While the principal accused Indrani Mukerjea’s advocate Ranjeet Sangle has called the missing articles advantageous for themselves as the DNA report itself is questionable.
During the ongoing trial in the special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court in Mumbai, special public prosecutor C.J. Nandode informed on Thursday that they are unable to find Ms. Bora’s remains, which were collected from Gagode village of Raigad district in 2015. This came to light when Sir J. J. Hospital, Mumbai’s forensic expert Dr. Zeba Khan was in the court to record her deposition in the matter on having shown Ms. Bora’s purported remains.
“Since the last three dates, the witness is in the box, the examination of the witness is stalled only because the CBI is searching for the articles which they say are missing,” Mr. Sangle said.
“My apprehension is whether this is a fraud played upon the CBI itself because the records seem that none of the officers of the CBI had ever physically or visually seen these articles. They have always been in sealed boxes. Now the chain of custody will establish from whom the CBI had received these articles, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Delhi, or Sir J.J. Hospital or B.Y.L. Nair Hospital (Mumbai). The paper trail will establish this,” he said.
According to the victim’s mother and the prime accused in the case, Ms. Mukerjea, no skeletal remains were ever discovered, and the evidence never existed. She continues to maintain that her daughter is still missing.
So far, the CBI continues its search for the missing articles and hasn’t constituted an enquiry to fix the responsibility or registered a case. On the other hand, AIIMS Media Coordinator Rajiv Maukhuri refused to comment on the whereabouts of the boxes.
Despite the unavailability of her remains, the prosecution has sought to examine Dr. Khan in the case without showing her the evidence. During the investigation, Dr. Khan had reportedly identified them as human remains.
Later, these were handed by the Mumbai Police to the CBI, who in turn sent it to AIIMS, Delhi for DNA profiling.
“Although we haven’t found Ms. Bora’s remains, we have a DNA report, which is conclusive enough and was also produced in the court. The prosecution’s case remains unaffected as during the initial phase of the trial, the remains were produced in the court,” said a source from the prosecution’s side to The Hindu.
Additionally, it was on the statement of Ms. Mukerjea’s driver and accused-turned-approver Shyamvar Rai that the case first came to light in August 2015, who had then guided the investigating agency to Gagode village. Apart from the DNA report, the prosecution is also relying on Mr. Rai’s statement. The DNA report from the AIIMS is “fabricated”, Mr. Sangle told The Hindu, as the electropherogram is supposed to be a completely computerised report, but the one submitted in the court had certain non-computerised noting and rubbed the digits.
An electropherogram is a graphical representation or computer generated graphs that display the test result.
The special CBI Court hasn’t so far given its ruling on the authenticity of the DNA report. The case is scheduled to be heard on June 27 for further recording of evidence, possibly without Ms. Bora’s remains.
- Telegram
SEE ALL
PRINT
Maharashtra
/
crime, law and justice