Supreme Court To Formulate SOP For Timely Investigation Of Child Missing Cases

The Supreme Court recently expressed its intention to formulate a common Standard Operating Procedure (SoP) for the recovery of missing children, a problem which is rampant across the country, as noted by the Court.

A bench comprising Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice R. Mahadevan was hearing a matter concerning the recovery of a child who had gone missing in 2011 when she was 1 year and 10 months in Tamil Nadu. When the matter was heard on January 16, the Court noted that the State of Tamil Nadu had finally woken up from slumber and had taken some steps.

It expressed concern that despite such incidents being rampant across the country, the States are not giving such matters due attention and priority.

"The endeavor of the Court would be to evolve a common Standard Operating Procedure, which is required to be put in place, as time is of great essence in such matters and is the most vital element in such cases, if at all there can be any real chances of recovery of such missing children," the Court observed.

Accordingly, it deemed fit to implead the Union of India through the Union Home Secretary and all the State Governments and the Union Territories through their respective Home Secretaries.

As per the petitioner's(father of the child) case, he had registered a child missing case, but the police did not take any effective measures to trace out the child, and filed a closure report before the Magistrate. Then the petitioner filed a habeas corpus, and the Madras High Court directed the Central Crime Branch to investigate, but they filed a report stating that the child is "undetectable".

Then a protest petition was filed before the Magistrate, which directed the Commissioner of Police, Chennai, to constitute a special investigating team, which also said that the child is undetectable. The matter was closed before the Magistrate, against which a revision petition is filed before the Madras High Court.

The petitioner alleged that, as per the 2013 Circular of the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, if a missing child is not traceable within four months, then the matter has to be forwarded to the Anti-Human Trafficking unit in each State. However, the High Court noted that all efforts were made to trace the child and dismissed the revision petition. The High Court noted that the 2013 Circular was not applicable as the child had gone missing in 2011.

Against this order, the present special leave petition was filed.

It should be noted that many benches of the Supreme Court have been hearing cases of missing children and organised child trafficking being operated by inter-State and intra-State gangs. A bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice R Mahadevan is hearing a public interest litigation(Guria Swayam Sevi Sansthan v UOI) concerning child trafficking and unresolved cases of missing children recorded on the Khoya-Paya portal.

The Court has noted that in such matters, the major difficulties in tracing trafficked or kidnapped children are the extensive and inter-State nature of trafficking networks. It has directed the Union of India to ensure all States/UT make available details of dedicated Nodal Officers to handle such cases and upload their details on the Mission Vatsalya portal.

Another bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan has been hearing criminal appeals(Pinki v State of Uttar Pradesh) filed against the Allahabad High Court, granting bail to accused persons in child trafficking cases. From time to time, the Court passed orders cancelling bail and cautioned the State Government to be vigilant about filing for cancellation of bail in such cases.

In this case as well, the Court has passed some general orders, such as for the expedited hearing of such cases, trials be completed in 6 months, and also sought data from the High Courts on the pending trials in child trafficking matters.

Case Details: G. GANESH v. STATE OF TAMIL NADU|Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 11263/2025

Click Here To Read Order

Appearances: For Petitioner(s) Mrs. Aarthi Rajan, AOR Mr. Arvind Srevasta, Adv. Ms. Abhilasha Sharwat, Adv. Mr. S. Santanam Swaminadhan, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Sabarish Subramanian, AOR Mr. Vishnu Unnikrishnan, Adv. Mr. K.s.badhrinathan, Adv. Ms. Jahnavi Taneja, Adv. Mr. Veshal Tyagi, Adv. Ms. Arpitha Anna Mathew, Adv.