Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

All Possible Efforts to Trace Missing Person Must Be Made - Delhi High Court in Missing Woman Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Delhi High Court disposed of a Habeas Corpus petition filed by Umesh Kumar, regarding the mysterious disappearance of his wife since November 19, 2022. The bench, comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Hon’ble Ms. Justice Shalinder Kaur, emphasized the importance of exhaustive investigative efforts in such cases.

The petitioner, aggrieved by the police's response to his wife's disappearance, approached the court seeking directions under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India for the production of his missing wife. “The case underscores the crucial role of law enforcement in meticulously tracking missing persons,” remarked Justice Suresh Kumar Kait.

The police registered FIR No.339/2023 under Section 365 IPC after a complaint from the respondent. Despite analyzing call records and conducting local searches, the whereabouts of the missing woman remain unknown. “In light of the aforesaid and since all possible efforts to trace the missing girl have been made and the FIR is pending investigation, we hereby dispose of the present writ petition,” stated the bench in their judgment.

The court has directed the concerned police officials to file a quarterly status report before the concerned Metropolitan Magistrate. Any significant development in the case must be promptly communicated to the petitioner.

Representing the petitioner were Ms. Neetu Rai, Mr. Alok Kr. Rai & Ms. Kanchan, while the respondents were represented by Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel (Crl.) with Mr. Shivesh Kaushik & Mr. Abhinav Kr. Arya.

This case brings into focus the challenges and responsibilities of the police in missing person investigations and the judiciary’s role in ensuring that all possible efforts are made in such sensitive matters.

Date of Decision: November 10, 2023

UMESH KUMAR VS THE N.C.T/GOVT. OF DELHI & ORS. 

Latest Legal News