New Delhi: The 1,200-page charge sheet filed in the JNU sedition case against 10 accused by the Delhi Police lists several oral, documentary evidence, all of which have been filed after three years of the incident, reports say.
According to the submitted pieces of evidence, the police said it found one of the accused Kanhaiya Kumar had received a text message from co-accused Umar Khalid who had asked him to come to Sabarmati Dhaba when he learned the authorities did not permit to hold to the event on Afzal Guru.
Delhi Police statement on 2016 JNU sedition case: Charge sheet filed. Names of 10 persons have been sent to court, requesting to initiate a trial. Names of 36 persons have been put in the list of persons against whom sufficient evidence hasn't come on file so far to launch trial. pic.twitter.com/DM0z5RZXag
— ANI (@ANI) January 14, 2019
This alleged message from Umar Khalid was verified by the forensics lab, while Kumar’s phone location also corroborated his movements following the message on February 9, 2016 said the sources, adding that these points were listed under the electronic evidence section of the charge sheet, TOI reports.
Kumar was spotted leading students who were raising anti-national slogans while he was also identified in the videos by witnesses and their statements were recorded before a magistrate under Section 164 CrPC, this is also admissible as evidence in court.
On the documentary evidence front, the then JNUSU president’s name being mentioned in the FIR registered by south district police soon after the event, apart from the administrative action taken against him by the chief proctor of JNU who suspended him for his alleged role in the event, have also been cited by police.
the Police’s chargesheet said none of the witnesses gave a statement against Umar Khalid under Section 164 CrPC, but the electronic evidence is against him claimed the police.
While the Indian Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-IN) claimed to have retrieved the pamphlets for the event from his email ID where his name is mentioned as an organiser.
The call detail records (CDR) analysis of the accused during the event mentions that Khalid had exchanged calls with co-accused Mujeeb Gattoo, Muneeb, Umair Gul, Anirban Bhattacharya and Kumar in connection with the event. Forensics analysis of the permission letter reveals that he forged two signatures on it.
However, the charge sheet doesn’t list documentary evidence against the Kashmiri students.
The report said that a witness recorded his statement under Section 164 CrPC identifying Gattoo as raising anti-national slogans while his mobile phone location corroborated the claims.
Similar evidence has been cited against Gul, Khalid Bashir Bhat, Rayess Rasool and Mujeeb’s brother, Muneeb.