SIT SCRAMBLE: JHARKHAND HC SLAMS POLICE OVER MISSING MINOR COLD CASE
W.P. (Cr.) (HB) (DB) No. 628 of 2025
By Sandhya Kaika
The Jharkhand High Court has expressed serious concern over what it described as an “inattentive approach” by the state police in investigating the case of a minor who has been missing since 2018. Although an FIR was registered in 2020, the Court noted that a Special Investigation Team (SIT) was constituted only in 2025, after the present petition was filed.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Sanjay Prasad sharply criticized the handling of the investigation, particularly the failure to conduct a “serious interrogation” of a named accused, identified as Respondent No. 5. The Superintendent of Police, Gumla, informed the Court that 34 witness statements had been recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS. However, the Court emphasized that recording statements during an inquiry is not a substitute for custodial interrogation, noting that these are distinct investigative tools.
The High Court observed that in offences of this nature, categorized as serious, the investigating agency has the discretion to resort to custodial interrogation where necessary. In this context, it referred to the guidelines laid down in the Satender Kumar Antil case concerning arrest and bail, underscoring the importance of effective investigation in such matters.
During the hearing, the Director General of Police appeared virtually, while the Superintendent of Police, Gumla, and the Investigating Officer were present in person. Taking note of the slow progress in the case, the Court warned that it may consider transferring the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation if tangible progress is not made.
While dispensing with the future personal appearance of the Director General of Police, the Court directed the Superintendent of Police and the Investigating Officer to remain present on the next date of hearing.
Next Hearing: May 5, 2026
