Karnataka High Court Mandates Detailed Report on Missing Persons Order Compliance
The Karnataka High Court has issued a directive to the state government, requiring the submission of a comprehensive compliance report concerning the implementation of Standing Order No. 1054. This standing order establishes a structured mechanism for handling missing persons cases across the state.
Key Requirements of the Compliance Report
In its order, the court specified that the government must clarify several critical aspects in the report. Firstly, it should confirm whether district missing persons units have been constituted in all districts as mandated. Additionally, the report must provide detailed information on the composition of the review and supervisory committees formed to monitor such cases, along with the frequency of review meetings conducted by these committees.
Further, the report is required to specify the total number of cases currently under investigation, categorizing them as active, dormant, or traced. It should also outline the coordination mechanism adopted with police authorities of other states in instances where a missing person is suspected to have moved outside Karnataka.
Background of the Case and Court Proceedings
The directive stems from a petition filed by Mahesh, a resident of Bengaluru, who approached the court after police placed the FIR registered on June 26, 2020, regarding his missing cousin Kumar, on the dormant list in May 2024. During the proceedings, police submitted a report detailing missing persons cases from 2020 until November 30, 2025.
A perusal of this report revealed significant statistics: missing person complaints were filed for 38,073 men, of whom 31,603 were traced, leaving 6,470 untraced. In the case of women and children, the numbers were higher, with 71,699 reported missing, of whom 68,718 were traced, leaving 2,981 untraced.
Court's Observations and Rationale
Justice Suraj Govindaraj, presiding over the case, emphasized that the large number of missing persons complaints, including those involving minor children and young girls reported across the state, cannot be overlooked. He noted that in many instances, families are left without meaningful information regarding the whereabouts of their loved ones for extended periods.
In such circumstances, the judge asserted that it becomes the responsibility of the state to ensure that the institutional mechanisms contemplated under the standing orders are not merely existing on paper but are effectively operationalized in practice. This underscores the court's commitment to enhancing accountability and efficiency in handling missing persons cases.
Current Status and Future Steps
Since the FIR registered regarding the petitioner's cousin has been reclassified as an "active case" and the investigation is ongoing, Justice Govindaraj disposed of the petition insofar as the petitioner is concerned. However, the broader matter will be listed next month for consideration of the compliance report, which the government is directed to submit by that time.
The state government has also placed on record Standing Order No. 1054, dated January 21, 2026, issued by the director general and inspector general of police (DG & IGP), highlighting the formal framework in place for addressing missing persons issues.
