Sheena Bora case: Arguments on framing of charges start

The CBI today started arguments on framing of charges in the sensational Sheena Bora case, saying it was her relationship with Rahul, former media baron Peter Mukerjea's son from earlier marriage, that led to her murder.
Indrani Mukerjea, her husband Peter and former husband Sanjeev Khanna are the accused in the case. Her driver Shyam Rai has been made an approver.
Special public prosecutors Bharat Badami and Kavita Patil contended that the trouble started when the accused learnt that Rahul (Peter's son with first wife) and Sheena (Indrani's daughter from earlier relationship) were in a relationship.
"There was total and full support to Vidhie (daughter of Indrani and Khanna) and total disregard towards Sheena," Badami argued.

Badami also told judge H S Mahajan that I-T returns of Indrani between 2005-08 showed she gave more money to Vidhie than to Sheena.
The reason for the murder was property, he said, adding that CBI added a charge of forgery against the accused in connection with a suspicious sale of property in Delhi.

Indrani had a soft corner for Vidhie and was worried if Rahul-Sheena marriage materialised, all the Peter's property will go to Rahul, the prosecutor said.
Badami also said Peter was fully aware of the crime. He was Rahul's father, but he did not take any "appreciable step" over Rahul's concerns when Sheena went missing.

In one of her emails to Indrani, Sheena expressed her desire to marry Rahul and said she was happy and safe with him, the prosecutor said, adding "it discloses true love and affection between them (Rahul and Sheena)".
"Indrani gave biggest gift to Sheena, she ended her
daughter's life," Badami said.
On the day of murder, after Rahul dropped Sheena at a place (in Mumbai) where Indrani was waiting for her, Indrani hugged her daughter. No previous instance where Indrani may have hugged Sheena came to light in the probe, he said.
Indrani purchased bottles of water, vodka and some sleep inducing medicines, which were given to Sheena. "After Sheena became drowsy, Indrani killed her and said (to the co-accused) that 'Sheena got her 3BHK flat'", said the prosecutor.

Investigators had earlier said that Sheena had demanded a 3BHK flat from Indrani.
Indrani could have used some other way to separate Rahul and Sheena, Badami pointed out, asking "why murder?"
As to Peter's defence that he was not aware of the conspiracy, Badami said Indrani had had a talk with him (on phone). "Never before the incident they had such a long chat, it was not ordinary call but she was reporting (about the murder) to Peter," Badami argued.
After strangling Sheena, Indrani could have hidden the body in the boot of the car, but she placed the body in the sitting position beside her and travelled (to the place where it was disposed), which showed her mental status, Badami said.

The prosecutor also asked why Peter, who was close to a senior police officer, did not use his contact to trace the missing Sheena when his son was distressed.
"These days even if a dog goes missing, advertisements are put, then why not for Sheena," Badami said.
About the co-accused Khanna, Badami said he had three objectives. "Vidhie was his daughter, for her uplift Sheena was a hurdle, and after Sheena's death Vidhie will be the ultimate beneficiary (of property)."
Khanna was like "Spiderman" (in his movements), as he came to Mumbai, committed the crime (alongwith Indrani) and went back to Kolkata, the prosecutor said.

CBI will continue its arguments tomorrow.