Supreme Court: In a special leave petition concerning the issue of missing persons, in which a Committee constituted by the Court and headed by Senior Advocate Mukta Gupta has been undertaking an exercise in coordination with the authorities and stakeholders concerned, the Division Bench of Ahsanuddin Amanullah and R. Mahadevan, JJ., directed all States and Union Territories to strictly comply with its order dated 22 May 2026 requiring registration of an FIR upon receipt of information regarding any missing person, irrespective of age or gender.
At the outset, the Court was informed that, pursuant to its order dated 22 May 2026, all States were required to register an FIR upon receiving information regarding any missing person. However, the Court expressed shock upon being informed that certain States were proceeding on the understanding that the expression “person” in the earlier order referred only to children and did not extend to adults. Rejecting this interpretation in strong terms, the Court held that such a position was a “deliberate and mala fide bogey” raised by the States concerned. It categorically clarified that the expression “person” means every person, irrespective of age or gender.
“We are shocked to learn that some of the States are under the impression that the expression ‘person’ refers only to children and does not include adults. We find this to be a deliberate and mala fide bogey raised by such States.”
The Court warned that any State or Union Territory failing to comply with its earlier order in its true letter and spirit would face contempt proceedings. It directed that notices of contempt be issued to the Chief Secretaries concerned and Directors General of Police, who would be required to remain personally present before the Court and file show-cause affidavits explaining why they should not be proceeded against and punished for deliberate defiance and non-compliance with the Court’s orders.
The Court also took note of the constitution and functioning of the Committee assisting it in the matter. It recorded that S.D. Sanjay, who had earlier represented the Union of India as Additional Solicitor General and was then serving as Advocate General for the State of Bihar, would continue as the Convenor/Coordinator of the exercise. Since he was no longer representing the Union of India, the Court directed that Additional Solicitor General Archana Pathak Dave would represent the Union of India and would also become a member of the Committee. Divyam Aggarwal, who had been assisting the Committee as a Consultant, was also directed to continue in that capacity.
The Court further recorded the progress made by the Committee in its consultation exercise. It was informed that 2 Zonal Consultation Meetings had already been held, while the third was scheduled for 8 August 2026. The 3 additional meetings were proposed thereafter and were expected to take approximately 1 month to complete. The Court noted that all stakeholders and agencies concerned with, or in any manner connected to, the issue would be invited to participate in these Consultation Meetings. It also recorded that substantial progress had been made in the exercise.
The Court separately took note of the non-compliance by the Union Territory of Ladakh. As Ladakh had not filed its response, as reflected in the Office Report and as brought to the Court’s attention by the Consultant, the Court directed the Chief Secretary and Director General of Police of the Union Territory of Ladakh to file personally affirmed affidavits explaining why appropriate action should not be taken against them for such non-compliance.
In addition, the Court observed that all States and Union Territories which had failed to file their affidavits despite its earlier directions were, prima facie, in contempt. Accordingly, it directed that contempt notices be issued to the Chief Secretaries and Directors General of Police of the States and Union Territories concerned. They were directed to remain personally present before the Court and file show-cause affidavits explaining why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them for failure to comply with the specific directions issued by the Court.
The Court also addressed the need for technological integration among the authorities dealing with missing persons. It requested Additional Solicitor General Archana Pathak Dave to communicate the Court’s concern to the agencies concerned regarding the integration of all relevant portals across the country and directed that the exercise be completed within 6 weeks. Recognising the keen interest shown by members of the Bar in assisting the Court in the matter, the Court further requested the Committee to receive and consider suggestions made by advocates.
The matter was accordingly directed to be listed on 5 October 2026 at 2.00 p.m.
[G. Ganesh v. State of T.N., SLP (Crl.) No. 11263 of 2025, decided on 5-8-2026]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
Committee Members: Ms. Mukta Gupta, Sr. Adv., Mr. S.D. Sanjay, Sr. Adv., Mr. H.S. Phoolka, Sr. Adv., Ms. Aparna Bhat, Sr. Adv., Dr. P.M. Nair, IPS (Retd.), Mr. Veerender Mishra, IPS.
AOR for Committee: Mr. Anuj P. Agarwala, Adv., Ms. Nitya Gupta, Adv., Mr. Akshat Gupta, Adv., Mr. Divyam Aggarwal, Adv., for PBA Legal LLP.
For Petitioner(s): Ms. Aarthi Rajan, AoR, Mr. Arvind Srevatsa, Adv., Mr. S. Santanam Swaminadhan, Adv., Ms. Abhilasha Shrawat, Adv., Mr. Kartik Malhotra, Adv., Mr. Aman Rawat, Adv.
For Respondent(s): Mr. Sabarish Subramanian, AoR, Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, A.S.G., Dr. N. Visakamurthy, AoR, Mr. Khushal Kolwar, Adv., Mr. Shubham Prakash Mishra, Adv., Mr. Akshat Agarwal, Adv., Ms. Disha Thakkar, Adv., Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Adv., Mr. Guntur Pramod Kumar, AoR, Ms. Prerna Singh, Adv., Mr. Dhruv Yadav, Adv., Ms. Eliza Barr, Adv., Ms. Akansha, AoR, Ms. Anjali Saxena, Adv., Mr. Govind Sharma, Adv., Ms. Disha Singh, AoR, Ms. Eliza Barr, Adv., Ms. Akansha, Adv., Ms. Anjali Saxena, Adv., Mr. Govind Sharma, Adv., Mr. Aaditya Singh Rajawat, Adv., Mr. Ankit Roy, AoR, Ms. Mrinalini Ramesh, Adv., Mr. Manish Kumar, AoR, Mr. Divyansh Mishra, Adv., Mr. Kumar Saurav, Adv., Mr. Vinayak Sharma, Standing Counsel, Mr. Ravinder Kumar Yadav, AoR, Mr. Yashwardhan Shah, Adv., Ms. Kritika Yadav, Adv., Mr. Subodh S. Patil, AoR, Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, AoR, Ms. Neha Singh, Adv., Ms. Apoorva Anand, Adv., Mr. Shekhar Raj Sharma, A.A.G., Mr. Samar Vijay Singh, AoR, Ms. Nidhi Narwal, Adv., Mr. Aman Dev Sharma, Adv., Ms. Sabarni Som, Adv., Ms. Srishti Jain, Adv., Mr. Deepak Chopra, Adv., Ms. Archana Sonthalia, Adv., Ms. Monica Gopichand Haseja, Adv., Mr. Anukirat Singh Baweja, Adv., Ms. Rashi Agnihotry, Adv., Mr. Anukirat Singh, Adv., Mr. Sankalp Malik, Adv., Mr. Ayush Panwar, Adv., Ms. Neelam Singh, AoR, Mr. Bhupender Yadav, Adv., Mr. Sameer Singh, Adv., Mr. Swagat Nanda, Adv., Ms. Pallavi Langar, AoR, Mr. Sanchit Garga, AoR, Mr. Kunal Rana, Adv., Mr. Shashwat Jaiswal, Adv., Ms. Diksha Arora, Adv., Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, Adv., Mr. Naveen Sharma, AoR, Mr. Harshad V. Hameed, AoR, Ms. Manisha T. Karia, A.A.G., Mr. Harmeet Singh Ruprah, AoR, Mr. Aditya Vaibhav Singh Ga, Adv., Mr. Karan Singh, Adv., Mr. Milind Sathe, Advocate General, Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AoR, Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv., Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv., Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv., Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv., Ms. Chitransha Singh Sikarwar, Adv., Mr. Lenin Singh Hijam, Adv. General/Sr. Adv., Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AoR, Mr. Karun Shamra, Adv., Ms. Anupama Ngangom, Adv., Ms. Rajkumari Divyasana, Adv., Mr. Avijit Mani Tripathi, AoR, Mr. Z.H. Isaac Haiding, Adv., Mr. T.K. Nayak, Adv., Mr. Daniel Stone Lyngdoh, Adv., Ms. Marbiang Khongwir, Adv., Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, AoR, Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Adv., Ms. Chubalemla Chang, Adv., Mr. Prang Newmai, Adv., Ms. Yanmi Phazang, Adv., Mr. Himanshu Shekhar Tripathi, AoR, Mr. Sourav Raj Choudhary, Adv., Mr. Maninderjit Singh Bedi, Sr. Adv./Adv. General, Mr. Rajat Bhardwaj, A.A.G., Mr. Karan Sharma, AoR, Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, A.A.G., Mr. Saurabh Rajpal, Adv., Mr. Kritin Sardana, Adv., Ms. Nidhi Jaswal, AoR, Mr. Basava Prabhu S. Patil, Adv. Gen. for State of Sikkim, Sr. Adv., Mr. Sameer Abhyankar, AoR, Ms. Yachna Sharma, Adv., Ms. Arushi Chopra, Adv., Mr. Samarth Kashyap, Adv., Mr. Arijeet Shukla, Adv., Ms. Devina Sehgal, AoR, Mr. Yatharth Kansal, Adv., Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, AoR, Mr. Saurabh Tripathi, Adv., Mr. Deepayan Dutta, Adv., Ms. Ruchira Goel, AoR, Ms. Ritika Rao, Adv., Mr. Sudarshan Singh Rawat, AoR, Ms. Anubha Dhulia, Adv., Mr. Sunny Sachin Rawat, Adv., Mr. Kunal Mimani, AoR, Mr. Uddyam Mukherjee, AoR, Mr. Swapnil Pattanayak, Adv., Ms. Kratika Kushwaha, Adv., Mr. Mukesh Kr. Verma, Adv., Ms. Indira Bhakar, Adv., Mr. Shashwat Parihar, Adv., Mr. Bhuvan Kapoor, Adv., Mr. Krishna Kant Dubey, Adv., Mr. Yogesh Vats, Adv., Mr. Shreekant Neelappa Terdal, AoR, Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, A.S.G., Mr. Dr. N. Vishakamurthy (AoR), Adv., Mr. Khushal Kolwar, Adv., Mr. Shubham Prakash Mishra, Adv., Mr. Akshat Aggarwal, Adv., Mr. Bhakti Vardhan Singh, AoR, Mr. Aravindh S., AoR, Mr. Akshay Gupta, Adv., Mr. Aadithya Aravindh, Adv., Mr. H.S. Phoolka, Sr. Adv., Mr. Bhuwan Ribhu, Adv., Ms. Prabhsahay Kaur, Adv., Ms. Rachna Tyagi, Adv., Mr. Saksham Maheshwari, AoR, Ms. Shashi, Adv., Ms. Taruna Panwar, Adv., Ms. Surpreet Kaur, Adv., Mr. Kartik Goyal, Adv., Mr. Prashanto Chandra Sen, AAG/Sr. Adv., Mr. S. Gowthaman, AoR, Ms. Rajalakshmi Singh, Adv., Mr. Sayantan Chanda, Adv., Mr. Abhisar Thakral, Adv., Mr. Chinnaiah, Adv., Mr. Akash Verma, Adv., Ms. Arundhati Katju, Sr. Adv., Mr. Anuj Kapoor, AoR, Mr. Nandeesh Nanda, Adv., Ms. Nehmat Sethi, Adv., Mr. K.M. Nataraj, ASG, Mr. Sudarshan Lamba, AoR, Mr. Sharathh Nambiar, Adv., Mr. Anuj Srinivasan Udupa, Adv., Mr. Kartikeya Asthana, Adv., Ms. Nikita Kapoor, Adv., Mr. Anando Mukherjee, AoR, Mr. Shwetank Singh, Adv., Mr. Utkarsh Anand, Adv. (For State of Mizoram).