In a sharp rebuke to the Delhi Police, the Supreme Court has expressed strong displeasure over the apparent dereliction of duty by law enforcement in a sensitive child custody case, where a Russian national allegedly absconded from India with her minor son in defiance of express judicial directions. The Apex Court described the incident as a “serious breach of judicial custody” and held the police accountable for their failure to prevent the unauthorized departure.
The case pertains to an ongoing custody dispute between an Indian citizen and his estranged Russian wife. Pursuant to interim orders issued by the Supreme Court, both parents had been granted joint custody and were residing separately in Delhi, taking turns in caring for their five-year-old son. However, on July 7, the father reported that the mother and the child were missing. He alleged she had not sent the child to school or medical appointments and had been untraceable thereafter.
Subsequent inquiry revealed that the woman had exited India by crossing into Nepal through Bihar, eventually boarding a flight from Kathmandu to Sharjah, and then flying onward to Russia, all in apparent violation of the Supreme Court’s earlier directions dated May 22, 2025, which had tasked the Delhi Police with discreet but effective surveillance to prevent such an outcome.
During the hearing, a Bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi severely criticised the police for failing to execute its responsibilities under the Court's instructions. “At the outset, we are constrained to observe that the incident of taking away the child has happened apparently due to sheer negligence and failure of the Delhi Police in performing its duties,” the Court observed.
The bench particularly took exception to the fact that, despite express orders, surveillance was not maintained. The child and mother reportedly exited the premises through the rear door. Justice Surya Kant remarked, “What were they doing? It is a clear case of criminal negligence. The local officials, including the DCP, owe a responsibility and will not be spared.”
The Court noted that there was a four-day window during which the mother and child remained in Nepal. Had the police acted with urgency, it could have intervened before the duo departed for Russia. Furthermore, the Court expressed grave concern over the possibility of the child’s Indian passport being forged or duplicated, given that the original was in the custody of the Court. The Bench also criticised the airline companies for refusing to disclose travel information, citing privacy policies. “No airline can claim a right to privacy in the matter of commission of crime. This shows complete lack of sensitivity and total negligence,” the Court stated.
Rejecting the narrative that the incident was a mere extension of a matrimonial dispute, the Court declared that the matter involved judicial custody. “The child was not just under the mother’s care, it was under the custody of this Court. This episode amounts to criminal contempt,” the Bench asserted.
While refraining from immediate penal action, the Court granted the authorities a final opportunity to rectify the situation. It directed the Ministry of Home Affairs to coordinate with the Indian Embassy in Moscow and pursue all available diplomatic and Interpol channels to secure the return of the minor child and the woman. Emphasising the seriousness of the matter, the Court stated, “This is not a dispute where custody had been granted to one parent over the other. The Court was acting as parens patriae. The Union of India must act with urgency and resolve.”
The matter has been scheduled for further hearing after ten days, with a compliance report expected from the concerned authorities.
Picture Source :