The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to grant Indrani Mukerjea the permission to travel abroad while her trial in the Sheena Bora murder case is pending, Live Law reported.

The court, however, ordered that the trial be expedited and completed within a year.

Indrani Mukerjea, accused of murdering her daughter Sheena Bora, was granted bail by the Supreme Court in May 2022 after being in custody for nearly six-and-a-half years.

Bora was allegedly strangled to death in a car on April 24, 2012, by Indrani Mukerjea, a former media executive. Bora’s body had been burnt and dumped in a forest in Maharashtra’s Raigad district. Indrani Mukerjea was arrested in 2015.

On Wednesday, Indrani Mukerjea’s counsel argued that the bail she was granted in 2022 allowed her to travel abroad with permission from the special Central Bureau of Investigation court, which is hearing the case.

The bench of Justices MM Sundresh and Rajesh Bindal was hearing a special leave petition by Indrani Mukerjea challenging the Bombay High Court’s September 27 order that denied her request to travel abroad.

The High Court had reversed the special court’s decision allowing Indrani Mukerjea to travel abroad for tasks such as paying property tax, updating her bank accounts and changing her Will to remove her ex-husband Peter Mukerjea.

Indrani Mukerjea’s counsel said that she wanted to travel to Spain to execute her Will.

When Justice Bindal said that her power of attorney holder in Spain could handle the matter, the counsel said that Indrani Mukerjea needed to register biometrics, which someone holding the power of attorney cannot do.

It was also argued by Indrani Mukerjea’s counsel that 92 witnesses were yet to be examined in the trial and that she had not travelled abroad in the past 10 years.

“There is no guarantee that you will come back,” Sundresh responded.

The counsel argued that Indrani Mukerjea had not misused her bail despite having the opportunity to flee as she had a valid passport. Only 19 witnesses had been examined in the last three years and the trial court was vacant, the counsel argued.