ADV Manoj Kumar

13/08/2026

🚨 SUPREME COURT: IMMEDIATE FIR MANDATORY IN MISSING PERSON CASES

⚖️ G. GANESH v. STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

SLP (Crl.) No. 11263/2025
Supreme Court of India — Order dated 22 May 2026

The Supreme Court has issued a clear and binding direction to all Police Stations across India concerning missing persons.

🔴 LAW LAID DOWN BY THE SUPREME COURT:

➡️ The moment information is received regarding ANY PERSON being missing, the Police must immediately register an FIR.

➡️ Police cannot wait for a preliminary inquiry before registering the FIR.

➡️ Police cannot tell the family/guardian to first search for the missing person before taking criminal action.

➡️ The Supreme Court specifically directed that the police machinery must be activated immediately, because the initial hours after disappearance are the “golden hours” for tracing and safely recovering the missing person.

➡️ The FIR must incorporate the relevant provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, including applicable provisions concerning kidnapping, abduction or trafficking.

➡️ Even if the missing person is recovered within 24 hours, the police are not permitted to remain inactive during those 24 hours. Immediate tracing and investigation must commence.

🔥 MOST IMPORTANT

The Supreme Court used the expression:

“any person missing”

Therefore, the direction is not confined merely to a complaint concerning a child. The operative direction expressly covers any person.

🚨 MESSAGE TO THE POLICE

A complaint regarding a missing person cannot simply be kept pending as a “Missing Person Report” where the Supreme Court has specifically directed immediate FIR registration.

NO PRELIMINARY INQUIRY.
NO WAITING.
NO DELAY.
IMMEDIATE FIR + IMMEDIATE INVESTIGATION.

This is a direction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and is required to be implemented by police authorities throughout the country.

📌 Case: G. Ganesh v. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors.
📌 SLP (Crl.) No. 11263/2025
📌 Order dated: 22.05.2026
📌 Bench: Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah & Justice R. Mahadevan

“Golden hours” cannot be lost to paperwork.

BNS2023 Ganes hCase HumanTrafficking Kid

12/08/2026

A Clear Message from the Supreme Court Marriage brings legal responsibility, not just emotional commitment. The Supreme Court of India has reaffirmed that a child born during a valid marriage is legally presumed to be the husband's child, even if questions are raised about biological parentage. Referring to Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, the Court stated that the provision protects a child's legitimacy, dignity, and future. The husband is considered the legal father unless it is clearly proven that there was no access during the time of conception. The Court also emphasized that DNA tests should not be ordered casually, as they can affect a child's privacy, identity, and social standing. The ruling sends a clear message: legal fatherhood is about responsibility, not convenience. Children should never suffer because of doubts, disputes, or conflicts between adults. (Supreme Court of India, Section 112, Indian Evidence Act, DNA Test, Legal Fatherhood)

11/08/2026

Inside Supreme Court of India

"Only condition is... you should be inside the jail."

A pointed exchange unfolded in the Supreme Court during a bail hearing before Justice Aravind Kumar.

When counsel submitted that three other accused had already been granted bail, Justice Kumar asked:"They were Nigerians?"

Counsel clarified that the other accused were not Nigerians and submitted that they were allegedly the persons who had sent messages to the victim and lured him to another country on the pretext of studies.

Seeking bail for the 23-year-old accused, counsel submitted that he had already spent more than 1 year and 7 months in custody, while not even a single prosecution witness had been examined.

"He has already learnt his lesson," counsel submitted, assuring the Court: "I will abide by any condition. I will not leave the country."

Justice Kumar responded: "Only condition is... you should be inside the jail."

The bail plea was ultimately withdrawn, with the Supreme Court granting liberty to renew the plea after one, two or three months.

Disclaimer: Inside India's Courtrooms is a public awareness initiative by LawBeat. This infographic is based on court proceedings and is intended solely for reporting and informational purposes. It does not reproduce the complete proceedings or constitute legal advice

28/07/2026

25/06/2026

Summer vacation Court hearings Saket

25/06/2026

Summer vacation Court Saket Delhi

24/06/2026

Rajesh Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
Delhi High Court
2024 SCC OnLine Del 1828
FIR: 498A/406/34 IPC
FIR quashed where allegations were found not sustainable on scrutiny.

19/06/2026

⚖️ Legal Update | Matrimonial Rights

Can a wife re-enter the matrimonial home after leaving voluntarily?

A wife does not get an automatic right to enter every property of the husband or in-laws merely because of the marital relationship.

The Supreme Court in:

S.R. Batra & Anr. v. Taruna Batra
(2007) 3 SCC 169

held that the right of residence under Section 17 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is limited to a legally recognised “shared household” and cannot be claimed in every property.

📌 Law:
• Section 17 DV Act – Right to reside in shared household
• Section 19 DV Act – Residence orders by Court

⚖️ Every case depends on facts like ownership, possession and court orders.

— Advocate Manoj Kumar Singh