SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 984

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Navin Chawla, Ravinder Dudeja, JJ
Bhagwan Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Nct Of Delhi – Respondent
W.P.(CRL) 30/2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Arpit Bhalla, P.P. Vashisth
For the Respondents: Sanjay Lao, Priyam Agarwal, Abhinav Kr. Arya, Aryan Sachdeva

The court exercises its extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 to direct the production of an individual in a Habeas Corpus petition to ensure safety and confirm their whereabouts, especially where prior judicial records exist concerning the parties.

Headnote:Statute Analysis: Article 226 of the Constitution of India and Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Facts of the Case: The petitioner filed a Writ Petition seeking a writ of Habeas Corpus to produce his missing daughter, arrayed as respondent No. 3.

Findings of Court:
The court took note of the status report regarding the disappearance and, considering a previous judicial order involving the parties, directed the State to produce the missing individual.

Issues: Whether the writ of Habeas Corpus should be issued to produce the alleged missing person before the court.

Ratio Decidendi: The court observed that given the history of the case and earlier orders restricting contact between the parties, justice requires the personal appearance of the missing individual to ascertain her safety and status.

Result: The court ordered the respondents to produce the missing individual on the next date of hearing, scheduled for 16th January, 2026.

Table of Content
1. granting procedural exemptions. (Para 1)
2. invocation of habeas corpus jurisdiction and contextual history. (Para 2 , 3)
3. court oversight of police reports and judicial directions for production. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)

O R D E R

06.01.2026

CRL.M.A. 238/2026 (Exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

W.P.(CRL) 30/2026

2. The present Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondent nos. 1 and 2 to produce the daughter of the petitioner, namely, Ms.xxx, arrayed as the respondent no. 3 herein, who has been reported missing since 23.12.2025.

3. It is stated that earlier the respondent no. 4, being the husband of the respondent no.3, had filed a similar Writ Petition, being W.P.(Crl) 32/2025, seeking production of the respondent no.3. In the said petition, vide Order dated 09.01.2025, this Court, after interacting with the respondent no. 3, had passed the following directions:

“7. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of with the direction with the following directions:

(i) Ms. A is free to accompany her parents without any pressure from the Petitioner;

(ii) That neither Ms. A nor her family shall level any threats and allegations against the Petitioner or his family. The same shall also be applicable to the Petitioner and his family;

(iii) The Petitioner shall not contact Ms. A or her family members, directly or indirectly, or try to interact with Ms. A in any manner;

(iv) Further, the Petitioner shall ensure that none of the photographs or videos of Ms. A, which are on his mobile phone, shall be misused or transmitted/communicated to anyone in any manner whatsoever. The Petitioner shall delete all the said videos and photographs and shall not use the same in future.”

4. Issue notice.

5. Notice is accepted by the Mr.Sanjay Lao, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos.1 and 2.

6. He has handed over a copy of the Status Report, which states that pursuant to the inquiry conducted on the complaint of the petitioner, various steps have been taken to ascertain the whereabouts of the respondent nos.3 and 4. It is further reported that the respondent no.3 had addressed a complaint to the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Sector-19, Dwarka, stating that she was going with the respondent no.4 of her own free will. He submits that the video statement of the respondent no. 3 has also been received.

7. The Status Report is taken on record.

8. Be that as it may, and keeping in view the order passed in the earlier writ petition, we direct the respondent nos.1 and 2 to produce the respondent no.3 before this Court on the next date of hearing.

9. List on 16th January, 2026.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top