Expressing concern over Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student Najeeb Ahmad whereabouts, who went missing 55 days ago, the Delhi High Court on Friday slammed police for still being clueless about the student.
Asking how can a man “vanish suddenly”, the court said the situation, where Ahmad’s mother has been running from pillar to post to be united with her son, can lead to “insecurity” among people.
“It is over 50 days. Still you (police) do not know about his whereabouts. How can somebody vanish suddenly and police has no clue about itIJ Even if we think of the worst, something has to be found out. We are pained that the missing person has not been traced till date,” a Bench of Justices GS Sistani and Vinod Goel said.
Ahmad went missing from JNU’s Mahi-Mandvi hostel on October 15 allegedly after an on-campus scuffle between him and some members of the Akhil Bhartiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP). The ABVP has denied involvement in his disappearance. The Bench said, “We are not concerned with the scuffle. We only want that the boy is recovered and he returns to his house. We are concerned that the mother should get her child.”
The court’s oral observation came after police and JNU informed it that Ahmad remained untraceable till date and they were making all efforts to locate him. The varsity and police were responding to the habeas corpus plea filed by Ahmad’s 45-year-old mother Fatima Nafees, who was also present in the court on Friday.
She has sought directions to the authorities to trace her 27-year-old son, who was pursuing MSc in Biotechnology from JNU. During the brief hearing, senior standing counsel Rahul Mehra, appearing for police, told the Bench that the Crime Branch has explored all angles to trace Ahmad and even issued advertisements. “We are diligent, We will do whatever is to be done at our level,” Mehra said.
On the other hand, JNU’s counsel Monika Arora submitted before that “since day one, the university is in regular contact with the Delhi Police obtaining updates and providing relevant information to the police regarding the incident.
“It is also stated that university has carried out its own search operation in the hostel and the campus of the JNU.”
To this, the Bench said, “This is something very serious. If a person disappears and remains untraced, it would create a sense of insecurity in the public of the city.”
The Bench asked police to “explore all angles” and listed the matter for further hearing on December 14. Arora, in a status report, said soon after the incident, the hostel warden had called a meeting, including Ahmad and other persons involved in the altercation. Some disciplinary measures were taken after Ahmad admitted his mistake for initiating the brawl/altercation with his fellow students.
“The issue was resolved in presence of JNUSU president and other college staff and students,” JNU submitted. It also told the Bench that the students involved in the scuffle have been identified and their immediate transfer from the hostel recommended.
The counsel said the office of the Chief Proctor has acknowledged that there was a scuffle and submitted the Proctorial Board report on the incident at the hostel.
“After Ahmad is found, the disciplinary action awarded to these persons will be again looked into,” the court was told. On November 28, the High Court had sternly asked the city police to “cut across all political barriers” and find Ahmad.