Police cannot compel adult woman to return home, and neither can her parents: that is the Kerala High Court’s holding, which still lets the police record her presence in a missing person case.
Ernakulam: A missing person complaint filed by a mother had led to a registered crime, and the Kerala High Court has ruled that the police may contact the daughter and record her presence, but may not make her return to her parental home against her wishes [X v. State of Kerala and Others].
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas disposed of the writ petition on September 26, 2026, the day it came up for admission. The three directions he gave balance the police’s duty to investigate against the woman’s freedom to choose where she lives.
Two quotations from the order
Justice Thomas began by finding no basis to treat the police contact as harassment.
“Identifying and obtaining details of the missing person is a part of the duty of the police, especially when an investigation has already commenced.”
The petitioner’s freedom as an adult came next.
“…she, being a major, is entitled to take decisions about her. Neither her parents nor the police can interfere with such freedom to decide.”
A crime had already been registered, the Court said, and had to be brought to a logical conclusion, so the petitioner had to report to the police to identify her existence and record her desire. The family dispute and the circumstances of the arranged marriage were not gone into.
Her petition, and the police reply
The petitioner, an adult woman, alleged harassment by the police. According to her petition, she left her parental home in April 2026 because her father did not permit her to continue her education, and a marriage had been arranged for her without her consent. She said she later left the matrimonial home too, wanted to continue her studies, and was now living in Thrissur. After her mother complained to the police, she alleged, she was repeatedly called to the police station, and she apprehended that this was an attempt to make her return to her parents against her wish and consent.
Appearing on instructions, the Government Pleader denied any harassment. Her mother’s missing person complaint had resulted in Crime No. 688 of 2026, registered on September 11, 2026 under Section 57 of the Kerala Police Act, 2011, and that was the only reason the police contacted her. Section 57, titled “Police to attempt to locate missing persons”, requires a Station House Officer who has reason to believe a person is missing and may be in danger to register the information and take immediate action to locate the person. A person who is found is to be handed over to a responsible guardian or produced before the competent Magistrate.
An adult’s choice, from Hadiya onwards
Courts have recognised more than once an adult’s right to decide where and with whom to live. In the Hadiya case (Shafin Jahan), decided on April 9, 2018, a Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra held that an adult’s choice is part of her autonomy and that a High Court could not override it by parental concern. The present order applies the same freedom to a woman who is the subject of a police missing person file.
What the petitioner must do, and what the police may not
On October 6, 2026, between 10.00 am and 11.00 am, the petitioner must appear in person before the Station House Officer of the Thrissur police station concerned. The Court further directed:
“If the petitioner does not intend to go back to her parental house or any other place, necessarily, none of the respondents shall compel her to do anything against her wishes.”
“…they shall only record her presence and if she expresses her unwillingness to return to her parental home, a report to the that effect can be made to the third respondent, who shall complete the investigation in the case and file appropriate report, in accordance with law.”
ALSO READ: Police’s Illegal Entry Into Woman’s Bedroom Violates Right To Privacy: Bombay High Court
A working line for missing person files
Families often file missing person complaints that end up reaching adult women who left home by choice. The order draws a working line: police may trace and speak to the person so as to close the file, but their role stops at recording her presence and her wish. Handing her back to the family or pressing her to return is outside it.
The investigation is protected as well. Once the woman’s unwillingness is recorded and reported, the Station House Officer concerned can file a final report in accordance with law, so the case does not stay open against her wishes.
Case Title: X v. State of Kerala and Others
Case Number: WP(C) No. 31584 of 2026
Bench: Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, Kerala High Court
Date of Judgment: September 26, 2026
Appearances: Advocate V.A. Johnson for the petitioner; Government Pleader Laya Mary Joseph for the State and police