Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 49594
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. Anand Venkatesh, P.B.Balaji, JJ
Muthulakshmi – Appellant
Versus
Superintendent of Police – Respondent
H.C.P.(MD)No.712 of 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: R.Karthika
For the Respondents: D.Venkatesh
The court possesses the authority to issue directions to police authorities to conduct investigations into missing person cases in compliance with established judicial guidelines to ensure effective resolution.
Headnote:The case involves a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of Habeas Corpus due to the disappearance of the petitioner's husband. A missing person report was filed, but the petitioner alleged inadequate investigative progress in locating the individual. The Court directed the respondents to conduct the investigation in accordance with established guidelines for 'man missing' cases to ensure a thorough search for the detenu. The core issue centers on the Court's authority to monitor and direct police investigations in cases of missing persons when initial police efforts are perceived as ineffective. The ratio decidendi emphasizes the necessity of strict adherence to judicial guidelines governing the search and investigation procedures in missing person cases to safeguard individual liberty and provide relief to distressed family members. The Habeas Corpus Petition stands disposed of with a directive for the police to expeditiously locate the individual.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. basis for invoking habeas corpus jurisdiction regarding missing persons. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. court's power to mandate specific investigative procedures for missing person reports. (Para 4 , 5) |
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by N. ANAND VENKATESH,J.)
This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed for a direction to the first and second respondents to produce the body or person of the detenu, who is the husband of the petitioner and to set him at liberty.
2. Heard the learned counsel on either side.
3. The case of the petitioner is that she was married to the detenu and out of the wedlock, they have a child. The petitioner's husband went missing from 21.06.2024 onwards and in spite of the best efforts, his whereabouts were not able to be ascertained. In view of the same, a complaint was given before the second respondent, based on which, a man missing FIR came to be registered in Crime No.226 of 2024. The grievance of the petitioner is that no effective steps have been taken to find the whereabouts of the petitioner's husband and under such circumstances, the present petition has been filed before this Court.
4. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of grievance expressed by the petitioner, there shall be a direction to the second respondent to conduct the investigation in line with the guidelines issued by this Court in the case of K. Sukumari Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar , reported in 2018(2) -L.W. (Crl) -636 and find the whereabouts of the detenu as expeditiously as possible.
5. This Habeas Corpus Petition is disposed of in the above terms.
