The prosecution, which was relying on establishing circumstantial evidence through Kukreja’s testimony, was pushed on the backfoot with his unexpected volte-face. It then had to produce a number of other witnesses and various documents to make its point, further delaying the already overstretched case.

The prosecution had brought Kukreja to court in September 2003, after he stated before a Magistrate that he had given his mobile phone bearing his personal number to prime accused RK Sharma during the latter’s stay in Pune in January, 1999.

The statement had come at a time when the prosecution was trying to reconstruct a chain of events to establish that Sharma had entered into a conspiracy with the other accused and was in constant touch with them on phone till Shivani, then a Principal Correspondent with Indian Express, was killed in her East Delhi flat on January 23, 1999.

But told to depose before the sessions court, Kukreja resiled from his earlier statement and said that the incriminating version had come under police pressure.

Declaring him hostile, the prosecution then decided to cross-examine Kukreja. It claimed that Kukreja had turned hostile due to some extraneous reason and confronted him with a reply in his own handwriting to a police notice, whereby he had admitted to having given his mobile phone to Sharma. The prosecution also contended before the court that prior to recording his earlier statement, Kukreja was told about its effect and consequences, which found mention in his statement and so, legally, he was not allowed to retract.