Kerala High Court Seeks Reports From Immigration & Police On Suraj Lama Missing Case; Flags Lapses From Authorities

The Division Bench comprising Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice M B Snehalatha was considering the matter in which it had earlier directed the Special Investigation Team (SIT) to continue its investigation, to document the sequence of events from the time of Lama's arrival to India until he was found dead.

The observations came after the Government Pleader submitted a memo on behalf of the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Ernakulam, detailing the sequence of events preceding Lama's death. However, the Bench found significant gaps in the report submitted, particularly at the stages of immigration clearance, subsequent police intervention, and the handling of a missing person complaint.

Suraj Lama was deported from Kuwait and sent to Kochi pursuant to official orders. However, despite his visibly vulnerable condition, described as involving possible cognitive and other impairments, he was cleared by all authorities, including immigration and airport security, and allowed to leave the airport without assistance.

The Court had previously expressed concern over the administrative handling of deportees, asking if any protocol was in place. Subsequently, a body was found from Kalamassery, which was confirmed to belong to Lama by a Forensic report.

According to the report, Suraj Lama was noticed by passengers at the airport, yet he was able to clear immigration and exit the terminal. He was subsequently noticed by CISF personnel, who informed the Terminal Manager. The Terminal Manager, in turn, alerted the Police Aid Post, stating that Lama was behaving in a careless manner.

The Court observed that there was no recorded suspicion against Lama at that time, nor was there any allegation of a cognizable offence. In what appeared to be a normal human reaction, the police officer on duty at the Airport Aid Post permitted Lama to board a metro feeder bus and proceed.

Despite this, disciplinary action appears to have been initiated against the Sub-Inspector posted at the Aid Post. The Court remarked that, prima facie, there seemed to be little justification for singling out the officer, particularly when Lama had committed no offence warranting detention. The Bench noted that the officer may have acted in furtherance of humanism in allowing Lama to travel.

“ Interestingly, there was no mention that there was any suspicion against Suraj lama at the time and as a normal human reaction, the police officer in duty at the police aid post allowed him to board a metro feeder bus and travel. For some reason, action appears to have been taken against the officer, who was at the aid post but against whom prima facie, we cannot find much of a course or reason to complain.” the court stated.

The report states that the man-missing case of Lama was filed on the evening of October, 08, 2025. In the night of 08.10.2025, Lama was transported in a police vehicle to the Kakkanad area, when the local residents informed the Thirkkakara Police that a man was seen exhausted and wandering in the Vazhakkala Village. Even though the police took Lama from Vazhakkala, he was dropped off at Kakkanad area by the Police.

Subsequently, on October 10, 2025, Lama was again located by police in another area and taken, with police assistance, to Government Medical College, Kalamassery.

The Court identified this stage as the real trouble spot in the chain of events. It noted that Lama was effectively taken into police custody on at least two occasions but was left unaccompanied, without being placed under the care of any authorized person, despite circumstances that may have attracted the provisions of the Mental Healthcare Act.

“Obviously, the real trouble is not at the airport aid post as is now shown but at the stage of immigration and thereafter on 08.10.2025 and 10.10.2025, where Suraj Lama was literally taken into custody by Police but left unaccompanied by any officers, despite the fact that he would have been covered by the provisions of the Mental Healthcare Act.” Court noted

The Court also highlighted a lacuna in the manner in which the missing person case was handled. It observed that had the information provided by Lama's wife on October 8, 2025, been effectively disseminated to officers in the vicinity and surrounding areas, Lama might have been identified much earlier.

The Deputy Solicitor General of India (DSGI) submitted that she would obtain specific instructions from the Immigration Department and file a detailed report by the next posting date.

The Court has also directed the concerned Police Officer to file a final report addressing the omissions identified by the Bench. The Court clarified that its observations are preliminary in nature and subject to further investigation.

The case will be taken up on Friday for further consideration.

Case No: WP (Crl) No. 1421/2025

Case Title: Santon Lama v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Counsel for Petitioner: A Parvathi Menon