Delhi HC orders missing person case, probe into Rohini ashram management

Share:
Audio Loading voice…
Delhi HC orders missing person case, probe into Rohini ashram management

Synopsis

The Delhi High Court has ordered police to register a missing person case for a woman allegedly held at a Rohini ashram whose founder absconded during a criminal trial and is now reportedly dead — and has simultaneously ordered a probe into who actually runs the establishment and where its money comes from.

Key Takeaways

The Delhi High Court on 25 August directed the SHO of Vijay Vihar Police Station to register a missing person case for a woman allegedly missing from the Adhyatmik Vidhyalya ashram in Rohini .
A division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia also ordered a broader inquiry into the ashram's management and funding.
The ashram's founder reportedly absconded during a criminal trial and is now reported dead, according to the CBI's Special Public Prosecutor .
The missing woman's luggage was found at the ashram, but followers told the court she was not currently residing there .
The SHO must submit a report and appear personally before the court at the next hearing on 31 August .

The Delhi High Court has directed the Station House Officer (SHO) of Vijay Vihar Police Station to register a missing person case and investigate the whereabouts of a woman allegedly missing from the 'Adhyatmik Vidhyalya' ashram in Rohini, while also ordering a broader inquiry into the functioning and management of the spiritual establishment. The order was passed on 25 August by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia.

Background: Parents' Plea

The petition was filed by the missing woman's parents, who sought their daughter's release from persons associated with the Rohini-based ashram. The parents told the court they were in poor and deteriorating health and, given their advanced age, had no one else to care for them. The case brings into focus concerns about the influence of spiritual establishments over followers and the accountability of such organisations.

What the Court Was Told

Amicus curiae Aakansha Kaul informed the bench that she had spoken with two women present in court who identified themselves as followers of the spiritual order. Both stated that the woman in question was not currently residing at the Rohini ashram, though her luggage remained there. Two other women — Pragati, who said she lived at an ashram in Nangloi and had visited the Rohini premises on the day of the hearing, and Shyam Lata, who said she belonged to the same spiritual order but did not reside at any ashram — also made statements before the bench.

Ashram's Founder Reported Dead, Management Unclear

The court recorded a series of troubling facts about the ashram's internal affairs. According to the Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the founder and spiritual head of the ashram had been facing a criminal trial, had absconded during the proceedings, and was now reportedly dead. The bench further noted that despite reports available in a connected writ petition, there was no clarity on who currently runs the ashram, where its funds — and those of related ashrams — originate, or how these establishments are being managed. 'In the aforesaid circumstances, we are of the opinion that the affairs of the ashram and the manner in which they are being run need to be probed and inquired into,' the CJ-led bench stated in its order.

Court's Directions

The Delhi High Court directed the SHO of Vijay Vihar Police Station to register a missing person case and conduct an inquiry into the woman's whereabouts. The SHO has been asked to submit a report and remain personally present before the bench on the next date of hearing to brief it on the outcome. The court also requested Sameer Vashisht, Standing Counsel for the Delhi government, to communicate the order to the concerned SHO and extend all necessary assistance. Relevant case details from the writ petition are to be shared with the police officer after record inspection.

Next Hearing

The matter has been listed for 31 August, to be taken up alongside a connected writ petition and placed 'High on Board'. The outcome of the police inquiry and the SHO's report are expected to shape the court's next steps in determining both the woman's safety and the broader accountability of the ashram.

Point of View

Even with an active connected writ petition on record, points to systemic oversight failure. The founder's alleged absconding during a criminal trial and subsequent reported death without resolution raises questions about how such institutions evade scrutiny for years. Unless the police inquiry and the court's broader probe yield enforceable outcomes, this risks becoming another case where judicial concern does not translate into institutional reform.
NationPress
25 Aug 2026

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did the Delhi High Court order an inquiry into the Rohini ashram?
The Delhi High Court ordered an inquiry because a woman was allegedly missing from the Adhyatmik Vidhyalya ashram in Rohini, and the court found no clarity on who currently manages the ashram or where its funds come from. The ashram's founder had also reportedly absconded during a criminal trial and is now reported dead.
What has the court directed the police to do?
The court directed the SHO of Vijay Vihar Police Station to register a missing person case, conduct an inquiry into the woman's whereabouts, and submit a report before the bench on the next date of hearing on 31 August. The SHO must also be personally present in court.
Who filed the petition and what did they seek?
The petition was filed by the missing woman's parents, who sought her release from persons associated with the Rohini ashram. They told the court they were elderly, in poor health, and had no one else to look after them.
What is the current status of the missing woman?
According to followers who appeared in court, the woman is not currently residing at the Rohini ashram, though her luggage and belongings remain there. Her actual whereabouts are unknown, which is why the court has ordered a police inquiry.
When is the next hearing in this case?
The matter has been listed for 31 August, to be heard alongside a connected writ petition and placed 'High on Board', indicating it will be taken up early in the day's proceedings.
Nation Press
The Trail

Connected Dots

Tracing the thread behind this story — newest first.

8 Dots
  1. Latest 1 month ago
  2. 1 month ago
  3. 2 months ago
  4. 3 months ago
  5. 4 months ago
  6. 5 months ago
  7. 9 months ago
  8. 1 year ago
Google Prefer NP
On Google