Delhi Police Under Scrutiny for Delays in Lodging FIR in Kidnapping Case

Delhi Police Under Scrutiny for Delays in Lodging 

FIR in Kidnapping Case


The Delhi Police have come under criticism for delays in registering an FIR in a kidnapping case, where six months elapsed between the initial missing person report and the registration of an FIR. This matter, brought to light in a habeas corpus case pending before the Delhi High Court, highlights concerns over law enforcement’s efficiency in handling sensitive missing persons cases.


Case Background: Missing Boy in Bhajanpura


On January 10, 2024, a boy went missing from the Bhajanpura area of Delhi. Despite his mother’s repeated attempts to seek help, the police registered an FIR only on June 29, 2024, under Section 365 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which pertains to kidnapping or abduction with intent to confine. Frustrated with the lack of progress, the mother, represented by Advocate Fozia Rahman, filed a habeas corpus petition in the Delhi High Court to expedite the search for her son.


Status Report and Investigation Delays


A division bench comprising Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Amit Sharma is hearing the case. The Delhi Police, in a status report filed before the High Court, stated that despite all possible efforts to locate the boy, they failed to gather concrete information in the initial months. After filing the FIR on June 29, 2024, the investigation was assigned to HC Sonu, followed by SI Kunal on July 3, 2024.


The delay in filing the FIR and assigning the case for investigation has raised questions regarding the police's procedures and prioritization of missing persons cases. 


Developments: Social Media and Digital Leads


Since the filing of the habeas corpus petition, the Delhi Police have filed multiple status reports. In September 2024, they informed the Court of new information indicating the missing boy might be using an Instagram account. Social media became a critical avenue for the investigation, as the police sought cooperation from various platforms to retrieve user data.


On September 6, 2024, investigators identified an Instagram user ID, @shabanashabana8032, suspected to be used by the missing boy. Subsequently, under Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), police sent a notice to Meta Platforms Inc. (Instagram’s parent company), requesting access to account details, including phone number, IP address, and device information. However, Meta had not responded to this request as per the latest updates from the investigation officer.


Challenges with Social Media Cooperation


The Delhi Police’s reliance on social media to track the boy exposed challenges in law enforcement’s interaction with technology companies. Meta Platforms informed the Court that the requested data had been uploaded on a secure platform accessible to law enforcement. Standing Counsel Sanjay Lao confirmed receipt of this information, and the High Court subsequently directed the platforms to file their responses.


This aspect of the investigation brings forth larger issues of cooperation between law enforcement agencies and tech companies, especially in cases involving urgent humanitarian concerns like missing persons.


Court’s Observations and Recommendations


The Delhi High Court has noted its concerns regarding delays in locating missing persons. The Court referenced its own judgment from July 2024, emphasizing that the first 24 hours following a missing report are critical for locating a missing child or person. In the same judgment, the Court outlined that delays beyond this period significantly reduce the chances of safe recovery and may jeopardize an individual's safety.


Additionally, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has voiced its challenges in working with tech companies for cases involving urgent data requests. In a recent submission, the MHA’s Nodal Officer detailed the difficulties and offered suggestions to improve protocols for data exchange between law enforcement and social media platforms.


Call for Improved Protocols and Cooperation


This case has highlighted the need for streamlined processes and enhanced collaboration between law enforcement and social media companies to avoid delays in locating missing persons. It points to the importance of:

- Swift FIR registration following a missing person report

- Early use of digital tools and data from social media for investigation

- Improved response time from social media companies to law enforcement requests for user data


As more cases involve digital footprints, the effectiveness of cooperation between law enforcement agencies and tech companies becomes increasingly vital.


Conclusion


The delay in filing the FIR and subsequent challenges faced by the Delhi Police in this case underscore a need for enhanced coordination and efficiency in handling missing persons cases. For families in distress, delays not only add to their anguish but can also compromise the safety of their loved ones. This incident sheds light on systemic gaps in protocol and emphasizes the importance of swift response times to safeguard lives.

Comments

Popular posts

Father of RG Kar Victim Loses Faith in Legal System Amid Allegations of CBI Inconsistencies

Bill Gates Applauds India's 'Namo Drone Didi' Program: A Game-Changer in Rural Empowerment and Agri-Tech

Flight Operations Disrupted Amid India-Pakistan Tensions: Air India and IndiGo Cancel Multiple Flights on May 13, 2025

Your Complete Online Guide to Land Records and Services in Bihar

Equality Before Law

Rights of a Arrested Person in India

Evolution of Constitution under Article 14 to 18

Supreme Court Advocates for Childcare and Feeding Rooms in Public Spaces

Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Former Bank Manager Accused of Defrauding Woman of ₹13 Crores

Exploring Articles 236 to 238 of the Indian Constitution: A Contemporary Discourse