Non-Production Of Case Property And Missing Link Evidence In Seizure Cases Vitiates Prosecution: Himachal Pradesh High Court Employees Compensation Act | Death Due To Cardiac Arrest During Employment Is An 'Accident' Arising Out Of Stress And Strain Of Duty: J&K High Court Transfer Of Proceedings | Courts Must Issue Fresh Notice To Parties Even If They Had Appeared Before The Transferor Court: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Award Section 80P(4) IT Act Does Not Deny Deduction To Regional Rural Banks As They Retain The 'Deemed Co-operative Society' Status Under Section 22 RRB Act: Madras High Court Property Purchased In Name Of Child For Family Benefit Is Not A 'Benami Transaction' Under Section 2(9) Of The 1988 Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court Person Without Caveatable Interest Cannot Challenge Will Or Seek Revocation Of Probate: Madras High Court Divorce | Cruelty Must Be Assessed By Cumulative Effect Of Matrimonial Conduct Rather Than Isolated Incidents: Orissa High Court Merely Labeling Insurance Policy As Comprehensive Does Not Create Unlimited Liability: MP High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Must Be Rejected If Limitation Bar Is Apparent From Face Of Pleadings: Patna High Court Limitation Act | 'Sufficient Cause' Cannot Be Used To Revive Stale Or Dead Claims By State: Orissa High Court Quashes Order Condoning 53-Year Delay Employee Cannot Remain Dormant Like Rip Van Winkle & Awaken At Convenience: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Stale Service Plea With ₹25K Cost Section 29 NDPS Act | Mere Allegation Of 'Cooperation' Without Specific Overt Acts Cannot Sustain Charge Of Conspiracy: Rajasthan High Court Forest Land Status Does Not Extinguish Private Civil Title: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Decree For Possession Once Admitted In Evidence, Document Cannot Be De-Marked On Grounds Of Insufficiency Of Stamp Duty: Telangana High Court Section 190 BNSS | Mere Presence In Unlawful Assembly With Active Intent Renders Member Vicariously Liable For Homicidal Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Contributory Negligence Under Motor Vehicles Act Cannot Be Inferred Without Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Enhances Compensation Motor Vehicles Act | Section 164 Compensation Of Rs. 5 Lakhs Applicable Even To Pending Claims Arising Prior To 2019 Amendment: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consumer Protection Act | Builder Liable To Pay Interest For Delayed Possession Despite Force Majeure Plea If Agreement Executed Post-Outbreak: State Commission

Every Effort Must be Made to Trace the Missing - Delhi High Court in Habeas Corpus

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Delhi High Court, in a significant judgment on a habeas corpus petition, emphasized the importance of persistent and effective police action in cases of missing children. The bench, comprising Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Shalinder Kaur, highlighted the duty of the police in situations where a minor's whereabouts are unknown.

The case involved a 14-year-old girl who went missing from Lal Bahadur Shastri Hospital in 2018. Despite the availability of CCTV footage showing the girl being harassed by a known individual, Janu, and his cousin Ankit, the police were initially hesitant to file an FIR. It was only after the intervention of the Delhi Commission for Women that an FIR was registered.

In a significant observation, the court stated, "In cases involving missing children, every effort must be made to trace the child. The initial reluctance of the police in such serious matters is unacceptable." This statement underscores the court's stance on the urgency and seriousness required in handling cases of missing minors.

Janu and Ankit confessed to the kidnapping, yet the police failed to trace the girl. The High Court, acknowledging the ongoing investigation, disposed of the petition but mandated the police to file quarterly status reports on their progress to the concerned Metropolitan Magistrate.

This ruling serves as a reminder of the critical role law enforcement plays in protecting the most vulnerable members of society. The court's directive for continuous vigilance in unresolved cases sets a precedent for future investigations involving missing children.

The petitioner was represented by Mr. Arbaaz Khan and Mr. Shalanki Prasad, while the respondent, the State (NCT of Delhi), was represented by Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel (Crl.), with Mr. Priyam Agarwal, Mr. Abhinav Krumar Arya, and Mr. Shivesh Kaushik, along with ACP/AHTU/Crime and SI Gunjan Singh AHTU/Crime Branch.

Date of Decision: November 10, 2023

SHIVDEVI VS STATE (NCT OF DELHI)       

Latest Legal News