Chargesheet offers glimpse into juvenile’s fear of parent-teacher meetings
The juvenile has been accused of murdering a class 2 student of a private school on Sohna Road to delay examinations and ensure cancellation of a parent-teacher meeting.gurgaon Updated: Feb 07, 2018 17:59 IST
The chargesheet filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on Monday contains eight pages from the parent-teacher meeting (PTM) register of the accused from his previous class (Std 10) to throw light on his academic performance.
The juvenile accused has been accused of murdering a class 2 student of a private school on Sohna Road to delay examinations and ensure cancellation of a PTM.
The CBI officials have also filed as evidence an examination answer sheet of the accused where he had not written a word, and was seen disturbed in the class.
His 11-page academic record, also a part of the partial chargesheet that CBI officials brought to the district court in one trunk and two bags on Monday, was also taken from the school. The record shows that the academic performance of the juvenile accused in classes 9 and 10 was average.
He had secured a CGPA score of 5.2 out of a possible 10 in class 9 and 6.0 in class 10 in the exams conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE).
On the basis of statements given by teachers who have been listed as witnesses, the chargesheet mentions that the mother of the accused would often break down during PTMs over her son’s performance.
The chargesheet contains 1,706 pages out of which 1,526 pages contain description of the evidences including the details of the school CCTV footage, statements of forensic experts, circumstantial evidence, recovery of articles from the school and the accused, and the fingerprints of six school staff members.
A supplementary charge sheet will be filed in a month’s time.
Among the documents presented before the court is a nine-page report of the registration IP address, alternate email address, and dashboard data of the accused and his login details. The accused’s activity on the internet from July 11 to November 2 have been recorded and presented in the chargesheet.
The chargesheet states that the juvenile accused had removed his mobile number from the recovery option of his email id.
According to CBI officials, the internet usage before the murder throw light on his conduct and intention to commit the crime, and his internet usage after the crime shed light on his conduct after the crime to escape from clutches of law.
The chargesheet also includes 10 pages of biological examination, DNA profiling, original serological examination report and chemical examination report of the accused and the victim.
There is also a 181-page report related to the recovery of materials in the case, including the laptop of the accused, his computer, pen drive, school bag, uniforms, school shoes and his email details.
A five-page report gives details on the 15 school teachers who had identified the juvenile accused in the CCTV footages shown by the CBI on December 23.
The chargesheet also submits pictures of the accused and the victim performing together in a school event.
Earlier, the accused had told the investigating officials that he had never met the victim in the school.
Box: Why no blood stains on the accused?
The chargesheet includes a report from Dr Deepak Mathur, a forensic expert at the Civil Hospital, who states there was a possibility of an assailant not getting blood stains on his clothes when an injury—such as slashing the neck—are inflicted while standing behind the victim. In such case, the blood would spurt forward or upwards, rather than towards the accused standing behind. Mathur added that the schoolbag on the back of the victim is likely to have also created a space between the bodies of the accused and the victim.