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

High Court Directs Continued Efforts in Tracing Missing Minor, Stresses on Monthly Status Reports - Delhi HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment concerning a habeas corpus petition, the Delhi High Court, on January 25, 2024, ordered the continuation of diligent efforts to trace a missing 15-year-old girl. The case, titled Sangita Morya Versus State (W.P.(CRL) 961/2022), was presided over by the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Jain.

The petitioner, Sangita Morya, approached the court seeking help in finding her minor daughter, Ms. ‘S’, who went missing under mysterious circumstances on January 18, 2022. The petitioner expressed suspicion over her neighbor, Vishal, aged 30, who has since been declared a proclaimed offender under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

In the court's observation, it was noted, "In light of the aforesaid discussion, since all possible efforts to trace the missing girl have been made, we hereby dispose of the present writ petition." This emphasizes the court's acknowledgment of the efforts made by the police in this troubling situation.

Further elaborating on the steps to be taken, the court directed, "The concerned police officials to file a monthly status report before the concerned Metropolitan Magistrate." The directive aims to ensure continued and focused efforts in the investigation. The court also ordered that "if any clue is found about the minor daughter of the petitioner, the same shall be communicated to her and if she is rescued, she be produced before the concerned Metropolitan Magistrate."

This judgment highlights the High Court's commitment to the safety and well-being of minors and underscores the importance of persistent efforts in missing person cases. The case, however, remains a matter of deep concern, with the whereabouts of the young girl still unknown.

The petitioner was not represented by any advocate, while the State was represented by Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel (Crl.), along with Ms. Priyam Agarwal, Mr. Abhinav Kr. Arya, and Mr. Shivesh Kaushik.

Date of Decision: 25th January 2024

SANGITA MORYA VS STATE

 

Latest Legal News