A Mother's Heartbreak: The Mystery of the Missing Indian Student

The Disappearance of Najeeb Ahmed: A Nine-Year Mystery

Nine years ago, a young Indian student vanished without a trace. Najeeb Ahmed, a 27-year-old biotechnology student at the prestigious Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) in Delhi, disappeared in October 2016 under mysterious circumstances. His disappearance has left his family and supporters searching for answers for nearly a decade.

The night before his disappearance, Najeeb was involved in a scuffle with members of the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), a right-wing student group. Despite the incident, the ABVP students have denied any involvement in his disappearance. Since then, India's Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has been working to uncover what happened to him, taking over the case from city police in 2017.

Recently, a court in Delhi decided to close the investigation after the CBI claimed it had exhausted all possible leads. In its order, the court expressed hope that Najeeb would be found soon. However, his family has criticized the investigation as inadequate and plans to appeal the decision in a higher court.

Najeeb’s mother, Fatima Nafees, has spoken out about the lack of progress. She questioned how a premier investigating agency could fail to locate a missing student from one of India’s top universities. “We will not give up until we find our son,” she said.

Born in a village in Uttar Pradesh, Najeeb was the eldest of four children. His family made significant sacrifices to support his education at JNU. After completing his undergraduate degree, he was determined to study there. His mother tried to dissuade him, warning him that he was too naive. But he ignored her advice.

On the night of October 14, 2016, Najeeb reportedly got into a fight with ABVP students who were campaigning for hostel elections. JNU is known for its intense student politics, with ideological groups often clashing over campus issues. According to his roommate, Mohd Qasim, Najeeb was injured during the altercation and taken to a public hospital, where he allegedly refused treatment.

The doctors told him they could not treat his wounds without a formal crime complaint being filed with the police. Najeeb did not file a complaint and returned to campus. The next day, he went missing, leaving behind his phone, wallet, and clothes in his hostel room.

A CBI report indicated that Najeeb last used his phone and laptop around 10 am on the day he disappeared. A hostel warden reported seeing him getting into a tuk-tuk in the morning and leaving campus. His mother, who had been informed of the scuffle by his roommate, was on her way to Delhi when she arrived and found him missing. She filed a missing persons complaint on October 15, 2016.

For days, there was no progress. Protests erupted on campus as students and activists accused authorities of inaction. In November 2016, Najeeb’s mother filed a petition in the Delhi High Court, accusing the police of being "slow, misdirected and subjective" and calling for a court-monitored probe.

A month later, Delhi Police conducted two extensive searches using sniffer dogs across JNU’s sprawling campus, but nothing was found. In May 2017, the court handed over the investigation to the CBI.

A year later, the CBI told the court it had exhausted all possible leads and asked the bench to close the case. The agency claimed it had examined more than 500 witnesses, collected information from taxi, bus, train, and flight operators, and searched hospitals and morgues, but found nothing. A one million rupees reward for information about Najeeb also failed to yield results.

The case dragged on for two more years, when in 2020, Najeeb’s mother returned to court to challenge the CBI’s conclusions. She alleged the agency failed to properly investigate the students involved in the scuffle with her son, claiming they had a "clear motive" and should have been arrested. The CBI denied these allegations, stating they had left "no stone unturned" in looking for Najeeb.

In its decision to close the case, the court stated that the CBI had investigated "all plausible avenues" thoroughly but had found "no credible information" about Najeeb’s whereabouts. The judge dismissed the mother’s plea, noting that while witnesses confirmed verbal threats, there was no "direct or circumstantial" evidence linking Najeeb’s disappearance to the fight with ABVP members.

Despite this, the court allowed the CBI to reopen the case if new information comes to light. The decision has been a huge blow for Najeeb’s family and well-wishers.

Colin Gonsalves, who represented Najeeb’s mother in the Delhi High Court in 2018, questioned the investigation. He pointed out that police routinely arrest people for minor crimes in India, yet none of the students involved in the fight were taken into custody for questioning.

Najeeb’s mother also suggested that his religion may have affected the seriousness of the investigation. She asked, “If the victim had been a Hindu boy, would the police have responded the same way?” She alleged that authorities would have demolished the houses of those suspected, referring to the rising instances where homes of individuals accused of crimes are bulldozed by Indian authorities.

The CBI has consistently maintained that it carried out the probe impartially. In 2018, the Delhi High Court found no evidence that the CBI investigated the case unfairly or under political compulsions.

Despite the setbacks, Najeeb’s family remains determined. Every 15 October, the day her son vanished, his mother joins a candle march at JNU in his memory. The hope has dimmed, but the wait continues.

“Sometimes I wonder if I should put a nameplate outside our house,” said Nafees Ahmed, his father. “Our house has been renovated. What if he comes, but can’t recognize it?”