Complete lack of interest by CBI in finding JNU student Najeeb Ahmad: Delhi high court | delhi news | Hindustan Times
  • Tuesday, Jul 17, 2018
  •   °C  
Today in New Delhi, India
Jul 17, 2018-Tuesday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

Complete lack of interest by CBI in finding JNU student Najeeb Ahmad: Delhi high court

The HC remarks came after contradictions appeared in what the CBI said in court and what it had indicated in its status report.

delhi Updated: Oct 17, 2017 08:46 IST
Soibam Rocky Singh
Soibam Rocky Singh
Hindustan Times, New Delhi
Najeeb Ahmed had gone missing from JNU hostel on October 15, 2016.
Najeeb Ahmed had gone missing from JNU hostel on October 15, 2016.(Sanjeev Verma/HT File Photo)

The Delhi high court on Monday pulled up the CBI over the manner of its probe into the disappearance of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student Najeeb Ahmad, who went missing in October last year, saying “there was complete lack of interest” on part of the agency in pursuing the case.

A bench of justice GS Sistani and justice Chander Shekhar observed that there was “no result either way. No result even on paper”.

The strong remarks came as the bench found contradictions in the Central Bureau of Investigation’s submission in the court and its status report on the issue of analysis of the calls and messages of the suspected students in the case.

The agency’s counsel said the call details records (CDR) of the accused in the case was analysed but the court noted that “it is not mentioned in the status report”.

It made the remarks while hearing the plea of the missing student’s mother, Fatima Nafees, seeking directions from the court to trace her son, who disappeared from JNU’s Mahi-Mandvi hostel on October 16 last year.

The student went missing after an altercation with some students belonging to the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP). Later, the students of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh-affiliated ABVP denied any involvement in his disappearance.

Delhi Police registered a kidnapping case and a special investigative team (SIT) was formed to trace him. The probe was later handed to the Crime Branch. The reward for information about Najeeb’s whereabouts was increased by the police from Rs 1 lakh to Rs 10 lakh but no one has come forward with any information.

The court handed over the probe to the federal probe agency five months ago but there has been no information about the 28-year-old whose disappearance remains the most talked-about issue on JNU campus.

It said that the agency should reveal what it has found in its investigation so far. Irked by the lack of details in the status report, the court said the deputy inspector general of police (DIG) was not supervising the investigation properly.

“If this is the supervision of the DIG, what will happen when there is no supervision? ... We direct the concerned DIG to ensure that the status report is filed under his signature or at least he should read them,” the court observed.

The court said it will ask the DIG to be present on next date of hearing but later dropped its order after the CBI counsel assured it that they will submit a better status report next time.

Advocate Kamini Jaiswal, who was representing Najeeb’s mother, told the court that the agency has overlooked two aspects in its probe - the CDR of the nine accused along with their location on that day and the examination of WhatsApp records of those people.

The court also said it was “surprised” at the local court’s listing of the hearing date on the agency’s plea for recording consent of the accused to a polygraph test.

“The CMM (chief metropolitan magistrate) has adjourned the CBI’s application for January 24, 2018... No reason has been given why the court has given such a long date, as the objective of polygraph test will get defeated by giving such as long date,” the court remarked.

The high court directed the concerned trial court to ensure that hearing dates are scheduled sooner in such applications and said: “the family of the complainant should undergo polygraph test”.

“We want to know what exactly happened,” the court said.

Jaiswal said Najeeb’s family had no objection to a polygraph test.