Disposed

Mujeeb Khan for and on Behalf of Aftab Khan Missing v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC16 Feb 2026LPA/73/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Letters Patent Appeal by the brother of an Indian citizen who went missing while employed at a resort in Maldives, challenging disposal of his writ petition. The Division Bench directed Respondents 3 and 4 to grant consular access, assist entry/exit procedures and coordinate meetings with the employer and local investigative authorities.

What the court decided

AI extract

Mujeeb Khan for and on Behalf of Aftab Khan Missing Vs… — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~51

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision : 16.02.2026

¶4

- LPA 73/2026, CM APPL. 10469/2026 & CM APPL. 10470/2026

¶5

MUJEEB KHAN FOR AND ON BEHALF OF AFTAB KHAN MISSING .....Appellant Through: Mr. Zeeshan Khan, Mr. Kaleem Akthar & Mr. Saeed Masroor, Advocates (through VC).

¶6

versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Amit Tiwari, CGSC with Mr. Varun Pratap Singh, GP and Mr. Ayush Tanwar, Advocate.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

¶8

JUDGMENT

¶9

TEJAS KARIA, J. ( ORAL )

¶10

This Letters Patent Appeal is preferred against the Judgment and Order dated 15.01.2026 (“ Impugned Judgment ”) passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 2894/2025 (“ Writ Petition ”), whereby the Writ Petition filed by the Appellant was disposed of on the premise that the matter is ‘no longer a case of missing person’.

¶11

The primary concern raised by the Appellant in this Appeal is that the Impugned Judgment was delivered without addressing the substantive and ongoing grievance regarding the provision of consular access and legal

¶12

Signature Not Verified

¶13

Signed By:NEELAM SHARMA Signing Da te:1 7.02.2026 16:40:39

¶14

LPA 73/2026

¶15

Page 1 of 5

¶16

assistance necessary for initiating proceedings in the Republic of Maldives against the Employer - Resort for alleged negligence and violation of Labour and Safety Laws.

¶17

The Appellant is the brother and next of kin of late Mr. Aftab Khan, an Indian citizen, who was employed as a Chef De Partie with Ifuru Island Resort at Republic of Maldives (“ Resort ”) on a valid work visa valid from 13.03.2024 to 13.03.2026. On 27.01.2025, the said Mr. Aftab Khan went missing under suspicious and unexplained circumstances while allegedly undertaking a snorkelling activity originating from the Resort at which he was working.

¶18

In the circumstances, the Appellant filed the Writ Petition seeking urgent intervention for the protection of the life, liberty and dignity of his missing brother and for issuance of appropriate writs and / or directions to the Respondent authorities to conduct a fair and effective inquiry into the disappearance of Mr. Aftab Khan, to coordinate with authorities at Maldives and to appoint a Nodal Officer for continuous liaison for facilitating consular access and legal assistance to the Appellant so as to enable him to pursue remedies under Maldivian Law, including proceedings against the employer Resort for negligence and violation of Labour and Safety Obligations.

¶19

During the pendency of the Writ Petition, Respondent No. 3, Ministry of Home Affairs, filed Status Report dated 25.03.2025 stating that the Indian High Commission in Maldives got the missing information of Mr. Aftab Khan through an e-mail dated 28.01.2025, sent by the Appellant’s Counsel and thereafter, the Indian High Commission pursued the missing complaint with the employer and concerned local authorities at Maldives. The Indian High Commission at Maldives was informed by the HR Manager of the Resort that

¶20

Signature Not Verified

¶21

Signed By:NEELAM SHARMA Signing Da te:1 7.02.2026 16:40:39

¶22

LPA 73/2026

¶23

Page 2 of 5

¶24

Mr. Aftab Khan was snorkelling at the Resort’s beach area with his friend, Mr. Paramjit and was swept away by strong currents in the sea. It was further informed that the rescue divers of the Resort immediately started rescue attempts and successfully rescued Mr. Paramjit but were unable to rescue Mr. Aftab Khan. Accordingly, the Indian High Commission vide e-mail dated 29.01.2025 informed the Appellant’s Counsel that the High Commission Officers were in touch with the local authorities in Maldives and were regularly following the case and provided assurance of all possible assistance. The Indian High Commission in Maldives received an e-mail from Maldives Ministry of Foreign Affairs on 10.02.2025 stating that they were closely following the matter. On 11.02.2025, the Indian High Commission in Maldives received response from the Maldives Ministry of Foreign Affairs forwarding a police report on the incident and the investigation updates. The Indian High Commission at Maldives forwarded the police report to the Appellant on the same day to keep him updated.

¶25

The Status Report further stated that the Indian High Commission at Maldives was in regular contact with the employer of Mr. Aftab Khan and the relevant authorities in Maldives and was regularly following up the case, which was still under investigation. It is also stated that the family of Mr. Aftab Khan has been extended all possible assistance in the matter and has been routinely kept informed, including facilitating their entry into the Maldives and arranging meetings with the Resort and local investigation authorities. In light of the same, the Status Report prayed that the Writ Petition may be disposed of.

¶26

The Appellant filed a detailed Rejoinder dated 08.04.2025 in response to the Status Report filed by Respondent No. 3 stating that the Status Report

¶27

Signature Not Verified

¶28

Signed By:NEELAM SHARMA Signing Da te:1 7.02.2026 16:40:39

¶29

LPA 73/2026

¶30

Page 3 of 5

¶31

was merely a recital of correspondence, devoid of any meaningful compliance with the judicial directions and exposed the continuing abdication of consular obligations by the Respondents.

¶32

The learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that despite the clear and categorical directions passed during the pendency of the Writ Petition vide orders dated 08.04.2025 and 29.05.2025, the Respondents have failed to facilitate consular access in the letter and spirit. It was submitted by the learned Counsel for the Appellant that although repeated written communications and e-mails were sent to Indian High Commission at Maldives and the appointed Nodal Officer, including the Embassy of the Republic of Maldives at New Delhi, specifically requesting facilitation of consular access and legal assistance for initiating proceedings against the Resort, no effective steps were taken in response thereto.

¶33

It was further submitted that the response received by the Appellant was a perfunctory communication advising him to approach the Maldives High Commission in New Delhi, which itself failed to respond or take any concrete steps and thereby creating an administrative impasse and frustrating the Appellant’s right to access justice in a foreign jurisdiction.

¶34

The learned Single Judge has, by way of the Impugned Judgment, disposed of the Writ Petition while observing that:

¶35

“1. In view of the status report placed on record by the respondent no.3, it is seen that the instant is, no more a case of missing person, and the appropriate steps have been taken by the Government to assist the family members of the petitioner in getting the petitioner’s belongings etc.

¶36

2. Under these circumstances, no substantive relief can be granted to the petitioner at this stage. The petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶37

3. However, liberty stands reserved to the petitioner to approach the Government in case the petitioner has any further grievance.”

¶38

Signature Not Verified

¶39

Signed By:NEELAM SHARMA Signing Da te:1 7.02.2026 16:40:39

¶40

LPA 73/2026

¶41

Page 4 of 5

¶42

The sole outstanding grievance of the Appellant pertains to consular access and legal assistance for exercising their rights to initiate legal proceedings against the employer of the late Mr. Aftab Khan, regarding alleged negligence or violations of Labour and Safety Laws.

¶43

Learned Counsel for the Respondents submitted that Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are fully cooperating with the Appellant and are in regular communication with the employer of the late Mr. Aftab Khan as well as the relevant authorities in the Maldives. Additionally, Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are diligently monitoring the progress of the case and have expressed their readiness to provide any necessary assistance to the Appellant, including facilitating entry into the Maldives and coordinating meetings with the Resort and local investigative authorities, as detailed in the Status Report dated 25.03.2025.

¶44

Accordingly, the present Appeal is disposed of with a direction to Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to grant consular access to the Appellant and their legal advisors in the Maldives, facilitate assistance for entry and exit procedures, and coordinate meetings with the employer of the late Mr. Aftab Khan as well as the local investigative authorities.

¶45

The Appeal and the pending Applications stand disposed of with the aforesaid directions.

¶46

TEJAS KARIA, J

¶47

DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ

¶48

FEBRUARY 16, 2026/sms

¶49

Signature Not Verified

¶50

Signed By:NEELAM SHARMA Signing Da te:1 7.02.2026 16:40:39

¶51

LPA 73/2026

¶52

Page 5 of 5

Mujeeb Khan for and on Behalf of Aftab Khan Missing v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Mujeeb Khan for and on Behalf of Aftab Khan Missing v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hazrat Khwaja Garib Nawaz Welfare Association Vs Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi

Jigyansh Gadi Vs University of Delhi and Ors.

Methodex Systems Pvt. Ltd. Vs Terracis Technologies Ltd. & Anr.

National Testing Agency Vs Vipin Kumar

National Council for Teacher Education and Anr. Vs Bansur Mahavidhyalaya and Anr. & Anr.

Tapas Priyaranjan Behera & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.