It was certain that Najeeb Ahmed was attacked by the RSS’s student wing, the ABVP, and it was also certain that he has been missing since 15 October 2016, but no trace of him could be found despite investigations conducted over a span of nine years by various agencies, including the CBI, whose closure report was accepted by a Delhi court, which observed that scuffles between student groups are normal and could not be linked to his disappearance."
It is true that skirmishes are normal in college life, but the fact of a right-wing involvement in attacking a Muslim student—when there was a hostile atmosphere on the campus, amid recurring right-wing attacks on Muslims across the country, particularly in campuses in Delhi, where innumerable violent attacks had been reported during the anti-CAA protests—has led critics to believe that the court’s observation was overlooking the ground reality.
A Delhi court on Monday, 30 June, accepted the closure report filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation, even as questions surrounding his disappearance remain unanswered.
In the order, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Jyoti Maheshwari acknowledged that a “perturbing incident” had occurred prior to Najeeb’s disappearance, but held that it was not sufficient in itself to establish that those involved had played any role in the subsequent events.
“Volatile atmosphere like the hostel elections and more so in a campus like JNU, such scuffles and exchanges are not unheard of, but the same is not a sufficient basis to conclude that these young students would go to an extent to cause disappearance of another student, especially when there is no evidence on record to suggest the same,” the Judge said.
Najeeb, a 27-year-old MSc Biotechnology student, had gone missing from Jawaharlal Nehru University on 15 October 2016, soon after he was allegedly assaulted by students affiliated with the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad, and despite investigations by both Delhi Police and the CBI, no conclusive evidence has emerged to indicate his whereabouts.
Following his disappearance, Najeeb’s mother, Fatima Nafees, filed a missing person complaint, and an FIR was registered, but as the investigation progressed without leads, she petitioned the court, leading to the case being handed over to the CBI in 2017.
Although the CBI filed its closure report in 2018, Nafees opposed it by filing a protest petition, and the matter remained pending before the Rouse Avenue Court, which has now accepted the agency’s conclusion that no evidence links any suspects to her son’s disappearance.
The court observed that while witness testimonies indicated physical assault and verbal threats against Najeeb, there was no direct or circumstantial evidence to link those events to his disappearance, and that mere hostility or motive without corroboration could not substitute for proof.
Referring to the charged atmosphere around the time of hostel elections at JNU, the court noted that such altercations were not uncommon, yet said this did not justify the presumption that fellow students would go to the extent of causing another student’s disappearance.
Stating that the truth may remain elusive, the court remarked that the quest for it must remain unwavering, even as it accepted that despite a thorough investigation, no information about Najeeb had surfaced to date, thereby justifying the closure report.
However, the court left the door open for future inquiry, stating that the CBI would be at liberty to re-open the case if it received credible information about Najeeb’s whereabouts.