Amend Section 174 CrPC to mandate inquiry into “Man missing” cases: Madras HC

The Madras High Court has directed the Central government to respond to a proposal to amend the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973 to statutorily require investigation into “man missing” cases..A Bench of Justice N Kirubakaran and Abdul Quddhose passed an order to this effect after it was told that there is no specific provision in the Indian Penal Code (IPC) that may be invoked by the police when it comes to the investigation of missing persons, unless there is an allegation of kidnapping or abduction involved..The Court was further informed that in such cases, the standard practice resorted to by the State police is to mechanically register complaints under the tag of “man missing” case or “woman missing case”. Deprecating the practice, the Court observed,.“This Court is unable to understand as to how an offence which is not stated in Indian Penal Code has been invented by the Police officials and FIRs are registered. Everyday, before this Court, a number of Habeas Corpus Petitions are filed to produce as missing of man, woman and children. .When there is no offence as “man missing” in the Indian Penal Code, it should have been brought to the notice of the policy makers so that appropriate Act would be amended to include new provision for “man, woman or children missing cases”. .As a possible solution to the lacuna, Assistant Solicitor General G Karthikeyan pointed out that Section 174 of the CrPC may be amended so that “man missing” cases are also mandatorily investigated, regardless of whether it involves any other offence. Presently, Section 174 of CrPC mandates that investigation should be conducted into all cases suspected to be a suicide. Concurring with the suggestion, the Court remarked,.“In man missing cases also, it is not known as to whether the missing person is alive or not and what are all the reasons for his disappearance. Therefore, Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure should be amended to include man missing cases under this provision so that an enquiry could be conducted.“.This apart the Court also took the opportunity to express its disapproval at the manner in which cases, including “man missing” cases are being stalled by the police in Tamil Nadu..The Court was informed that the police often do not look into whether the contents of such complaints make out a cognisable offence or not. The complaint is received mechanically and a CSR number is issued. Beyond this, the police often fail to file an FIR. Taking exception to this practice of confining police complaints to CSRs, the Court said,.“There is no provision shown to this Court regarding the issuance of CSR by the police officials. This kind of practice of issuing CSR should be deprecated and a decision should be taken by the police officials either to register FIR immediately or after considering the content of the complaint as to whether cognizable offence is made out or not or after conducting enquiry following the dictum laid down in ‘Lalithakumari case.'”.The same trend was also followed in the case before the Court, where a father had filed a police complaint to trace his daughter. The major daughter had left home for college in January this year and was expected to return roughly a month later. However, she did not return. Instead, the parents received a phone call from the daughter informing them that she intended to continue living with an uncle and his family..Whereas the Court is yet to deal with the merits of the case, it criticised the failure of the police to register an FIR on the complaint till date. The complaint was made in February this year. The Bench said,.“It is nothing but a deliberate failure on the part of the police officer which has to be deprecated. The police authorities should understand the pain and suffering of the parents and other relatives of missing persons, especially the girls. If the children of the officials or their relatives go missing, whether the officials would keep quiet without taking any effort? Probably, they would show interest only if prominent people go missing.”.The Court has also summoned the concerned police officer to explain to the Court the delay in registering a complaint in this case..Further, the Court impleaded the Union Law Ministry, the State Home Department and the Director General of Police to ascertain their responses to the following queries regarding “man missing cases”, i.e..Is there any provision with regard to man missing cases in the Indian Penal Code?If not in the Indian Penal Code, is there any other provision in any other Act?Why should the Central Government not amend Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to include “man missing case” also within the scope of Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?When would the Government bring an amendment to Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?How many cases of “man missing” have been filed in the past ten years in Tamil Nadu and throughout India?How many persons have been rescued or found?How many cases have been disposed?What is the rate of conviction?How many CSRs have been issued so far in Tamil Nadu for the past ten years?How many cases have been closed after conducting enquiry or after issuing CSR?How many complaints have been transferred as FIRs after issuing CSRs and conducting enquiry?.The matter has been posted to be taken up next on June 17..Read the Order:.Bar & Bench is available on WhatsApp. For real-time updates on stories, Click here to subscribe to our WhatsApp.