Madhya Pradesh HC Rules That Writ of Habeas Corpus Cannot Be Invoked for Missing Persons Without Allegation of Illegal Detention
Court Holds That Missing Persons Cases Should Be Investigated Under IPC & CrPC, Not Through Habeas Corpus Petitions
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has reiterated that a writ of habeas corpus cannot be invoked for tracing missing persons unless there is a prima facie case of illegal detention.
The Division Bench, comprising Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf, held that unlawful detention is a sine qua non for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus and that cases of missing persons should be dealt with under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
The ruling came in response to a habeas corpus petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution by a woman seeking the whereabouts of her missing daughter and two minor grandchildren.
Factual Background of the Case
The petitioner, Simmi Bai, had moved the Madhya Pradesh High Court, alleging that her daughter and two minor children had gone missing from Pune and were allegedly wrongfully confined by one Dileep Choudhary. A missing person report had already been lodged at the police station.
The police, during their investigation, prepared a memorandum on December 3, 2023, confirming that the corpus was seen traveling voluntarily on a motorcycle with a boy, along with her children.
Despite these findings, the petitioner sought a writ of habeas corpus, urging the court to direct police authorities to intensify their search for the missing persons.
Court’s Observations & Legal Reasoning
The Division Bench emphasized that a habeas corpus petition is only maintainable in cases of unlawful confinement or illegal custody. Mere disappearance or a person being untraceable does not justify invoking the writ jurisdiction of the High Court.
Referring to the precedents set by the Supreme Court in:
- Union of India v. Yumnam Anand M. alias Bocha alias Kora alias Suraj (2007)
- Home Secretary (Prison) v. H. Nilofer Nisha (2020)
The court held that habeas corpus cannot be invoked to trace missing persons in the absence of illegal detention.
It clarified that while physical confinement is not mandatory to constitute detention, there must be at least some form of unlawful control or custody over the person for the writ to be maintainable.
The court categorically stated that cases of missing persons should be handled under regular criminal provisions, and police authorities are bound to conduct investigations as per the CrPC and IPC.
The extraordinary writ jurisdiction of the High Court cannot be used as an alternative remedy to locate missing individuals.
Final Verdict
The High Court concluded that the petitioner failed to establish a prima facie case of illegal detention of her daughter and grandchildren. The status report revealed that the missing individuals had left voluntarily and were not under any wrongful confinement.
Dismissing the petition, the court directed the police to continue the search under the law and ensure a proper investigation as per the missing person report.
Case Details
- Case Title: Simmi Bai v. Shrimaan Police Mahanirikshak Mahodaya & Others
- Neutral Citation: 2025:PHC-JBP:5189
- Bench: Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva & Justice Vinay Saraf
- Petitioner’s Counsel: Advocate N.P. Rathore
- Respondents’ Counsel: Government Advocate Dr. Siddharth Singh Chouhan