india

Updated: Jan 04, 2019 12:07 IST

The 27th witness brought forward by the prosecution in the Sheena Bora murder case testified before a special Central Bureau of Intelligence (CBI) court on Wednesday. Former employee and friend of accused Indrani and Peter Mukerjea, Pritul Sanghvi told the court that the couple was against Bora and Rahul Mukerjea’s relationship.

Peter and Indrani wanted to separate the two since 2008, said Sanghvi. As per his testimony, Sanghvi got in touch with Indrani in 2002, when she took a property owned by him on rent. Later, he joined her company as a manager.

Sanghvi is one of the key witnesses, whose testimony has been used by the prosecution to establish that the couple was against Bora and Rahul’s relationship. The CBI has claimed that this served as motive for the two accused to kill Bora.

Sanghvi, who was a frequent guest at the couple’s parties, is considered to be an old friend of theirs. According to Sanghvi, he had been introduced to Bora as Indrani’s younger sister at one of these parties.

On being questioned about what happened in 2008, Sanghvi recalled an instance where Indrani and Peter had visited Rahul and Bora. “In 2008, I was told by Indrani to accompany her and Peter to Khardanda where Bora and Rahul were staying. They asked me to join them since it was close to my place,” Sanghvi told the court.

“They went there to separate them and make them understand,” Sanghvi told the court, adding that he chose not to enter the house and stood outside. “After the meeting, Indrani took Bora in her car and Peter took Rahul in his car and they drove in different directions.”

The next day, Indrani called Sanghvi and told him that she had explained to Bora that she did not like the relationship. Sanghvi added that Peter opposed the relationship as he wanted Rahul to focus on his career.

Sanghvi’s examination by the prosecution concluded on Wednesday, and he will now be cross-examined by Indrani’s and Peter’s lawyers separately.

While leaving the court, Sanghvi requested the court if he could wish Indrani on her birthday and wish the two of them a happy new year. However, the court refused, stating that he cannot speak to them until his evidence is recorded.