The Delhi High Court again rapped the Delhi Police over the manner of its probe into the disappearance of JNU student Najeeb Ahmed, saying it appeared to be looking for an "escape route" and was "beating around the bush".
A bench of Justices Vipin Sanghi and Deepa Sharma said the conduct of the police showed it was trying to sensationalise the matter.
This conduct itself ... you (police) pitch it (report) so high that you are sharing with us something so confidential which is not even shared with your trusted lawyer, gives us the impression that it was a fast one being played on us. We have to keep in mind the possibility that the police is trying to sensationalise or trying to find an escape route. We are left with the impression that the investigation is not being done properly.
The court was referring to the forensic analysis reports of the missing student's laptop and call records that the police had filed in a sealed cover, but had initially not even shared with its own lawyer.
‘Why Were Suspects Not Questioned on Day 1?’
The court also lashed out at the police saying it has been sending people across the country and setting up special investigating teams (SITs), but the nine students suspected to be behind Najeeb’s disappearance were not questioned on day one and neither were they taken into custody.
The police has faced the wrath of the court several times earlier in this case for the manner in which it has been carrying out the probe and even for not sharing some information with its own lawyer.
Noting that the text messages of the suspected students have not yet been examined, the court said if the messages of the period when Najeeb went missing have been deleted, "then that in itself is incriminating".
Criticising the manner the police carried out the probe, the court also said ,“If today it is Najeeb, tomorrow it could be anybody, just because he belongs to some other community or a political body”.
The DGP's Response
Responding to the court's observations, DCP Ram Gopal Naik, who heads the SIT, told the court how he went about investigating the case and the aspects and angles, including that of Najeeb's medical condition, were considered by him.
He said he could not seize the mobile phones of the suspected students as there was no material to proceed against them.
However, the bench disagreed with the stand saying if the suspected students had allegedly assaulted Najeeb a day before his disappearance, then "it was logical" to check their mobile phones.
It also told the police officer not to be "judgemental" about the medical condition of Najeeb.
During the hearing, which will continue on 16 May, the court also said there was nothing in the forensic analysis report with regard to Najeeb's laptop that showed that he was visiting websites related to ISIS, as had been reported by a newspaper.
The newspaper had based the report on police information, though the police had later denied any such development.
The court said the reporter who wrote the story should be asked from where he had got the information. To this, advocate Rahul Mehra, appearing for the police, said the reporter was asked about it and he had refused to disclose his source.
Najeeb went missing after an altercation with some ABVP students on the night of 14 October 2016. The RSS students' wing in JNU has denied any involvement in his disappearance.
(With inputs from PTI.)
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)