Karnataka High Court Flags Gaps In Tracing 'Missing' Persons, Orders Implementation Of SOP & District-Level Missing Persons Units
The Karnataka High Court has called for the State's records to verify the implementation of a Standard Operating Procedure devised earlier this year to deal with the larger systemic issues in tracing the missing persons. The single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindraj addressed the bigger picture of untraceable disappearances while hearing the specific grievance about a missing person's...
The Karnataka High Court has called for the State's records to verify the implementation of a Standard Operating Procedure devised earlier this year to deal with the larger systemic issues in tracing the missing persons.
The single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindraj addressed the bigger picture of untraceable disappearances while hearing the specific grievance about a missing person's FIR marked 'dormant' in 2022 without progress:
“It cannot be lost sight of the fact that a large number of complaints relating to missing persons, including minor children and young girls, are reported across the State, and in many cases families are left without any meaningful information regarding the whereabouts of their loved ones for long periods of time. In such circumstances, 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 operationalised in practice”.
The court has now asked the State to submit a 'comprehensive compliance report' regarding the implementation of Standing Order 1054, which deals with a procedure to be followed on receipt of information about missing children/persons, by 10th April.
Earlier, the report submitted by the DGP of Karnataka in the same matter pointed to 38,073 men gone missing, out of which 31,603 were traced. Similarly, 71,699 women and children were reported to have been missing, out of whom 68,718 were traced.
The court had then specifically expressed concerns about the number of teenage girls who had gone missing and remained untraceable during the time period.
Background
On 27.10.2025, the court had asked the state to explain how a 'missing person's FIR could be labelled 'dormant' when he was yet to be found. After taking the systemic issues at play into consideration, the court gave certain directions to tackle the institutional failure in tracing missing individuals.
At this juncture, the High Court called for a sound investigative response, especially in instances of missing women and children. The court noted that missing children must be placed equivalent to 'children in need of care and protection'. It also highlighted the need of a structured and verifiable dataset to adequately respond to the systemic shortcomings in missing persons' cases.
On 27.10.2025, the court had asked the state to explain how a 'missing person's FIR could be labelled 'dormant' when he was yet to be found. After taking the systemic issues at play into consideration, the court gave certain directions to tackle the institutional failure in tracing missing individuals.
As per the court order, the state filed the aforesaid details about the number of missing persons from 2020 to 2025.
On 21.01.2026, Standing Order No.1054 was issued by the government, detailing a set procedure that guides the response to be adopted in a missing person's case. Pursuant to the Standing Order, a circular was also issued on 29.01.2026.
Submissions & Court's Observations About Model SOP
Before the High Court, the Additional Advocate General has submitted that the modalities in the Standing Order, including the District Level Missing Persons Units and review committees, have been activated.
The court has also called for the details about the constitution of District Level Missing Persons Units (DMPUs) and Review Committees, the frequency of supervisory meetings held by the said committees, the number of missing cases marked as dormant, active or traced, steps taken for interstate police cooperation, and information about the national-level database and integrated database for tracking missing persons.
Missing Persons Units At District, Special Squads At Every Police Station & Review Committees
The aforesaid SOP laid down guidelines for the constitution of a District Missing Persons Unit (DMPU) as a nodal agency under the DCRB/CCRB, a Missing Persons Squad for ease of investigation at every police station, and exclusive investigation of transferred cases by Anti-Human Trafficking Units.
“…The Standing Order contemplates the establishment of a District Missing Persons Unit (DMPU) in each district. The purpose of constituting such units is to create a specialised administrative structure responsible for receiving complaints relating to missing persons, coordinating investigations, maintaining records and ensuring follow-up action in such cases”, the court observed after perusing the standing order placed on record.
A three-member committee at the state level, headed by the Inspector General of Police of the Range or the Commissioner of Police, has been constituted to review the investigation in every case where a person remains missing for over two months.
“…The supervisory committee is expected to examine pending cases, identify investigative gaps and issue appropriate directions to the concerned officers so that investigation continues in a meaningful manner”, the court added.
These committees are required to submit reports to the High Court Registrar every six months. The order also talks about the need for coordination with police authorities of other States, particularly in cases involving potential trafficking.
Interstate Police Coordination, Strict Timelines & Integrated Database
The court also contemplated the need for interstate police coordination when dealing with missing persons cases that transcend territorial limits.
“…In today's context, where mobility across State boundaries is common, it is often necessary for the police authorities of one State to seek the cooperation of their counterparts in another State for tracing missing persons. While the Standing Order provides a broad framework for such coordination, the precise modalities of inter-State cooperation cannot be exhaustively codified within the four corners of an administrative order or a standard operating procedure”, the court added that mutual cooperation on a case-by-case basis would be the key.
The court underscored that cooperation between police departments would be instrumental in tracing missing children and girls. The court also added that institutional efforts must be backed by a national database enabling coordination between states.
The SOP lays down a strict timeline for various investigative steps, underscoring that the first 48 hours and the first 15 days are crucial in such cases. It also provides for the Monitoring of the Digital Portal and Data Upload in respect of the said missing persons, and the details relevant to the concerned web portal.
Court's Order
In the meantime, the specific 'dormant' case of the petitioner's cousin has also been revived as an 'active' investigation by the police, pursuant to the directions of the High Court in the matter. As a result of the recommencement of investigation, the court has disposed of the writ petition insofar as the individual grievance of the petitioner is concerned.
Mr Kumar, a cousin of the petitioner, had gone missing in 2020. In 2022, due to the lack of progress in the investigation, the FIR on the missing person was marked as dormant. As a result, the petitioner approached the High Court seeking directions for revival of the police investigation.
Advocate Purushotama N appeared for the petitioner. AGA K.P Yashodha represented the state.
Case Title: Shri Mahesh v. State of Karnataka & Ors.
Case No: WP NO. 30006 OF 2024
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 107