Uttarakhand HC Orders CBI Probe in 8-Year-Old Missing Case

In a stinging rebuke to state investigative agencies, the Uttarakhand High Court has ordered the transfer of a 2017 missing person case to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The ruling comes after eight years of stalled progress, marking a significant intervention in a case involving the disappearance of a prominent religious figure.

The Vanishing: A Cold Trail Since 2017

The case surrounds the sudden disappearance of Mahant Shri Panchayati Akhara Bada Udasin Rajghat Kankhal, a national spokesperson for the Akhara Parishad. On September 16, 2017, the Mahant boarded the Lok Manya Tilak Express from Haridwar to Mumbai. By the time the train reached Bhopal, his seat was found empty. Despite immediate efforts by disciples and police, the trail went cold, leading to an FIR under Section 365 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Over the following seven years, the investigation saw multiple teams constituted and internal transfers between local units and the CBCID, yet no concrete progress was made. Even a directive from a Judicial Magistrate for reinvestigation failed to produce results, as investigative reports were repeatedly filed without substantial action.

The Legal Battle: A Matter of Fundamental Rights

Counsel for the petitioner argued that the state agencies’ failure to resolve the case constituted a grave dereliction of duty. Pointing to the recovery of the Mahant’s mobile phone from an individual named Ravi Kumar—who was never properly interrogated—the petitioner contended that the state’s approach was "careless."

Invoking the fundamental protection of Article 21 of the Constitution, the petitioner urged the court to intervene, asserting that a "fair and proper investigation is the right of every citizen."

The State, however, urged restraint, citing the Supreme Court’s precedent in Himanshu Kumar and others vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2022) , which holds that the power to transfer cases to the CBI should be exercised sparingly. They argued that the CBCID was working with sincerity and that federal agencies were already overburdened.

The Court’s Scathing Observations

Justice Pankaj Purohit, presiding over the matter, found the state’s performance inexcusable. The court’s decision was underpinned by the sanctity of life and liberty, emphasizing that state inaction had effectively silenced the constitutional guarantees provided to citizens.

Key Observations from the Judgment:

• On Judicial Conscience: "The conscience of this Court is particularly shaken by the fact that a citizen of this country is missing since eight years and the Investigating Agencies have not been able to trace his whereabouts."
• On Constitutional Mandate: "This Court is particularly conscious of the fact that Article 21 of the Constitution... declares that no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except in accordance with procedure established by law."
• On Definition of Liberty: "The words 'life' and 'personal liberty' used in Article 21 include all the varieties of 'life' which go on to make the personal liberties of man and not merely the right to the continuance of a person animal existence."

A Decisive Shift

The High Court has now ordered the state to surrender all records related to FIR No. 255/2017 to the CBI "forthwith." By invoking its extraordinary jurisdiction, the court has signaled that administrative inefficiency cannot be used as a shield to bypass the investigative requirements of a missing person case.

This ruling stands as a stern reminder to law enforcement agencies that the passage of time does not diminish the state's obligation to protect the fundamental rights of its citizens. For the families seeking closure, the involvement of the CBI offers renewed hope where previous efforts had only resulted in years of quiet despair.