<p class="rtejustify">The Special Investigation Team of the Criminal Investigation Department on Thursday submitted the complete records of the probe into the disappearance of Kumar Ajitabh, a techie, as directed by the court in the last hearing.</p>.<p class="bodytext rtejustify">Ajitabh, 29, a city-based software engineer, had posted an advertisement on an online portal to sell his car. He was reported missing from the city after he went to meet a prospective buyer on December 18, 2017.</p>.<p class="bodytext rtejustify">The high court, after going through the records submitted by the CID counsel, orally observed that there was some progress in the investigation.</p>.<p class="bodytext rtejustify">The investigation had got derailed for a while, but now it is back on the track, the court observed.</p>.<p class="bodytext rtejustify">It directed that the investigation records be kept in a sealed cover with the Registrar (Judicial) and not to be shared with the parents.</p>.<p class="bodytext rtejustify">The petitioner’s counsel stated that the parents were worried as they did not have any information about the development in the case and it has been over six months since their son went missing.</p>.<p class="bodytext rtejustify">To this, Justice Aravind Kumar orally assured the counsel that if the court had the slightest doubt in the investigation developments, it would transfer the case to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).</p>.<p class="bodytext rtejustify">In the last hearing, Ashok Kumar Sinha, father of Ajitabh, had sought the court’s directions to hand over the probe to the CBI from the Whitefield police, as there was no development in the case for the past six months.</p>.<p class="bodytext rtejustify">The CID counsel in response to this had stated that the agency was doing its best in probing the case.</p>.<p class="bodytext rtejustify">The CID counsel sought two weeks time to which the bench stated that if the agency showed any development, then it would grant the request.</p>.<p class="bodytext rtejustify">The court adjourned the hearing of the matter to July 31.</p>
<p class="rtejustify">The Special Investigation Team of the Criminal Investigation Department on Thursday submitted the complete records of the probe into the disappearance of Kumar Ajitabh, a techie, as directed by the court in the last hearing.</p>.<p class="bodytext rtejustify">Ajitabh, 29, a city-based software engineer, had posted an advertisement on an online portal to sell his car. He was reported missing from the city after he went to meet a prospective buyer on December 18, 2017.</p>.<p class="bodytext rtejustify">The high court, after going through the records submitted by the CID counsel, orally observed that there was some progress in the investigation.</p>.<p class="bodytext rtejustify">The investigation had got derailed for a while, but now it is back on the track, the court observed.</p>.<p class="bodytext rtejustify">It directed that the investigation records be kept in a sealed cover with the Registrar (Judicial) and not to be shared with the parents.</p>.<p class="bodytext rtejustify">The petitioner’s counsel stated that the parents were worried as they did not have any information about the development in the case and it has been over six months since their son went missing.</p>.<p class="bodytext rtejustify">To this, Justice Aravind Kumar orally assured the counsel that if the court had the slightest doubt in the investigation developments, it would transfer the case to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).</p>.<p class="bodytext rtejustify">In the last hearing, Ashok Kumar Sinha, father of Ajitabh, had sought the court’s directions to hand over the probe to the CBI from the Whitefield police, as there was no development in the case for the past six months.</p>.<p class="bodytext rtejustify">The CID counsel in response to this had stated that the agency was doing its best in probing the case.</p>.<p class="bodytext rtejustify">The CID counsel sought two weeks time to which the bench stated that if the agency showed any development, then it would grant the request.</p>.<p class="bodytext rtejustify">The court adjourned the hearing of the matter to July 31.</p>