The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court has strongly criticized the Uttar Pradesh state authorities for their “casual and cavalier attitude” regarding missing person cases. While hearing a petition filed by a father whose son has been missing since July 2024, the Court observed that the police machinery only set in motion after the Court took cognizance of the matter, nearly one and a half years after the initial complaint. The Division Bench of Justice Abdul Moin and Justice Mrs. Babita Rani has directed the Principal Secretary (Home) to file a personal affidavit explaining the protocol for dealing with missing person complaints uploaded on the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) website.
Background of the Case
The petitioner, Vikrama Prasad, approached the High Court through Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 11291 of 2025, alleging inaction by the police regarding his missing son. According to the judgment, the petitioner’s son, an adult aged about 32 years, went missing in July 2024 from the State capital. Consequently, the petitioner filed a missing person report on July 17, 2024.
The Court noted that after the filing of the report, “the matter attained a quietus,” and no significant action was taken by the authorities to redress the petitioner’s grievance. Aggrieved by the lack of investigation, the petitioner filed the instant writ petition on November 27, 2025.
Arguments and State’s Response
Considering the seriousness of a person going missing from the State capital, the Court had previously passed an order on December 1, 2025, requiring a personal affidavit from the Commissioner of Police, Lucknow, to indicate the progress made in the investigation.
During the hearing on December 17, 2025, the learned Additional Government Advocate (AGA), relying on the affidavit filed by the Commissioner of Police, submitted that:
- An FIR was finally lodged on December 2, 2025, vide FIR No. 0690 of 2025 under Section 137(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (B.N.S.), 2023.
- Efforts have now commenced to trace the missing person.
- The Incharge Inspector, Police Station Chinhat, Lucknow, has issued directions to obtain the missing person’s photographs, display them at various points, publish notices in newspapers, and broadcast the information via Doordarshan and radio.
When the Court queried how missing person complaints are generally dealt with, the learned AGA stated that “the complaints are uploaded on the website, and thereafter, they continue to remain on the website till such time, some impetus is given either by an order of the Court of law or otherwise.”
Court’s Observations and Analysis
The Bench expressed deep dissatisfaction with the authorities’ conduct, terming the writ petition a “classic example of the casual and cavalier attitude of the authorities.”
The Court observed that the official machinery only “got into motion” lodging the FIR and initiating search efforts after the Court’s intervention on December 1, 2025. This action was taken approximately one and a half years after the missing complaint was lodged.
Commenting on the procedure described by the AGA regarding the uploading of complaints, the Court remarked:
“This action indicates the lackadaisical attitude on the part of the State authorities in tracing out missing persons… It is only by means of the instant petition that the aforesaid situation has come to the notice of this Court i.e. a missing complaint being simply uploaded on the website of the authorities, and thereafter, no action being taken till such time, some action is required to be done by an order of a Court of law.”
The Bench further stated that such conduct is “not expected from a welfare State whereby the citizen has to approach the highest Court of the State in order to set in motion an action which is required to be done by the authorities themselves.”
Decision and Directions
The High Court has ordered the Principal Secretary (Home) to file a personal affidavit within three weeks addressing specific queries regarding the handling of missing person cases. The affidavit must indicate:
- The action taken pursuant to the petitioner’s missing complaint of July 2024.
- The number of missing complaint reports uploaded on the NCRB website since January 1, 2024, and the number of such cases redressed or persons traced.
- The procedure adopted by authorities once a complaint is uploaded to the NCRB website.
- Whether any information is sent to the complainant regarding the status of the report and the frequency of such communication.
The Court warned that if the personal affidavit is not filed, the Principal Secretary (Home) shall appear in person with the records to assist the Court.
The matter is listed for the next hearing on January 29, 2026.
Case Details:
- Case Title: Vikrama Prasad Versus State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others
- Case No: Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 11291 of 2025
- Coram: Justice Abdul Moin and Justice Mrs. Babita Rani
- Counsel for Petitioner: Onkar Pandey, Anand Kumar Singh
- Counsel for Respondent: G.A. (Government Advocate)
