The Punjab & Haryana High Court, comprising Acting Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor, took suo motu cognizance of a newspaper report dated 31 May 2026 which alleged that nine girls had gone missing within a span of forty‑eight hours in Ludhiana. The court characterised the report as a matter of serious concern and invoked its suo motu jurisdiction to examine the allegations and the response of the state administration.
In its order, the bench observed that the allegations contained in the newspaper report required a factual response from the authorities. Accordingly, the court directed the State of Punjab to file an affidavit sworn statement of the Deputy Commissioner concerned, addressing both the allegations raised in the report and the steps already taken by the administration in relation to the missing girls. The affidavit was to be filed within a period of ten days from the date of the order.
The bench, while issuing the direction, stated: “In the facts of the case, we call upon the State of Punjab to file an affidavit of the Deputy Commissioner concerned, with regard to the allegations contained in the newspaper report and the steps taken in this regard, within a period of ten days from today.” This statement was attributed directly to Acting Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor.
The court further clarified that the ten‑day period commenced on the date of the order and that the matter would be listed for further consideration on 23 July 2026. The adjournment was intended to allow the state sufficient time to gather the necessary information and to enable the court to assess the adequacy of the response before proceeding with any further directions.
The suit has been titled “COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION V/S STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.” indicating that the proceedings are initiated by the court itself without a formal petition from any party. By exercising suo motu cognizance, the court highlighted its role in safeguarding fundamental rights, particularly the right to life and personal liberty, when credible reports suggest a potential violation involving minors.
Legal observers note that the direction to file an affidavit is a common preliminary step in suo motu proceedings, enabling the court to obtain a verified account of the factual situation and the measures undertaken by the executive. The affidavit is expected to contain details such as the number of complaints registered, the identity of the investigating officers, any forensic or medical examinations conducted, and the coordination with police and child welfare authorities.
The matter remains pending before the division bench, and the next hearing on 23 July will determine whether the affidavit satisfies the court’s concerns or whether additional directions, such as the appointment of an amicus curiae or the issuance of notices to specific officials, are warranted. Until then, the order stands as a directive for the State of Punjab to provide a transparent and timely account of its actions concerning the reported disappearances.