Gurugram, Nov 14: The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) called the members of the special investigation team of Gurugram police for “discussion or questioning” on Monday. The premier agency reportedly found that vital and obvious clues were missed or misinterpreted during the investigation of the murder of Class 2 student in Ryan International School, Pradyuman Thakur, on September 8.

The Gurugram police SIT had investigated the murder initially, and had arrested a school conductor, Ashok Kumar, for murdering the child. When the CBI took over, it examined CCTV footage closely and found that a Class 11 student was also hanging around the toilet where Pradyuman was found murdered. After thorough investigation, the CBI detained the boy and claimed that he had murdered Pradyuman to get school exams postponed. The agency also indicated that the probe might be compromised and the knife– thought to be the murder weapon– was planted on Ashok Kumar.

The TOI reported that the two CBI teams that are investigating the case were in the city on Monday. One team was at the school and the other had called the four SIT members in the city. Though, CBI has not confirmed that they held a meeting with the SIT.

The SIT officials were asked how they missed obvious clues. The Gurugram police team had considered the boy a key witness, not the accused. The SIT included an ACP, an inspector, a sub-inspector and an official of lower rank.

“There were many clues which a cop won’t normally miss. We’re not alleging anything as yet, but we’re definitely curious about how investigating officials missed or misinterpreted these,” an officer told TOI.

Meanwhile, the CBI officials are trying to profile the accused to understand his mental state. Reports say that the boy was aloof.

The CBI claimed that the boy had admitted to the crime. It said that the 16-year-old accused told the agency that he had known Pradyuman from the piano class they attended together in the school. He took him to the toilet and slashed his throat from a knife he bought in Sohna. The boy, however, recanted and claimed innocence.