One protocol for Magistrates’ inquiry into rescued adult women, drawn up by the National Judicial Academy: that is what the Supreme Court has asked for under Section 17 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, so that consent, coercion and safety are weighed the same way across the country.
New Delhi: Asking the National Judicial Academy for a protocol for Magistrates’ inquiry into adult women rescued from suspected trafficking, the Supreme Court has requested a comprehensive set of guidelines for the threshold inquiry under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, while monitoring compliance with its Victim Protection Plan [Prajwala v. Union of India].
The order of October 13, 2026 was passed by a Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan in Miscellaneous Application No. 530/2022 in W.P.(C) No. 56/2004. Senior Advocate Aparna Bhat appeared for the petitioner, the NGO Prajwala, and Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati for the Union of India.
What the Court recorded
Guidelines are needed, the Court noted, for the threshold inquiry meant to identify voluntary sex workers, and the inquiry must be held even where the rescued adult says her work is voluntary. Its order records:
“request the National Judicial Academy to prepare a comprehensive protocol/guidelines to enable the Magistrates to conduct this inquiry.”
The petitioner may assist the Academy in preparing the protocol. As the order records, the protocol is to help Magistrates weigh the rescued woman’s consent and her views on long-term safe custody, her account of whether her work is voluntary, any threat, coercion or undue influence, and any real risk of danger or re-trafficking after release.
Directions, and the next date
Four additional directions in paragraph 456 of the May judgment have not been fully complied with by all States and Union Territories, the Court found. They deal with notifying recognised welfare institutions, preparing State-wide lists of eligible social welfare workers, and designating a Police Nodal Officer and a Government Nodal Officer. The Union must ensure full compliance before the next hearing and call for information from all stakeholders on how each direction has been implemented.
The Home Departments of State and Union Territory Governments must also notify the upgrade of Anti-Human Trafficking Units to police station status, as paragraph 362(b)(iii) of the judgment requires. The Union is to file a fresh status report, the petitioner is to update the Court on the Academy’s progress, and both sides are to suggest ways of tracking the Plan’s implementation and impact. The matter is next listed on December 14, 2026.
Section 17 in brief
Under Section 17 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, a Magistrate may inquire into information received about a rescued woman and her age. If the Magistrate is satisfied that she is under 21, she may be placed in a protective home or other suitable custody for a set period after being heard. The Magistrate may take the help of a panel of five respectable persons, preferably including three women, and the orders can be appealed to the Sessions Judge.
The May judgment and the October 13 hearing
The order follows the Court’s judgment of May 29, 2026 in the same matter, which issued nationwide guidelines on the rescue, post-rescue care and rehabilitation of victims of trafficking. That judgment held that mass raids should not be the default response, that a rescued adult’s informed consent should be the primary factor in decisions on protective-home detention or family restoration, and that voluntary adult sex workers should not be criminalised unnecessarily. It also called on Parliament to reconsider the conflation of trafficking and prostitution, including Sections 7, 8 and 20 of the Act.
At the October 13 hearing, Ms. Bhat told the Court that the Magistrate’s threshold inquiry needs uniform guidelines so that Magistrates across the country apply it consistently. She also placed a compliance table identifying 16 stakeholder groups under the Victim Protection Plan and their roles, which the Court welcomed.
Why the order matters
Consent sits at the centre of the May judgment’s approach to rescued adults, but its effect depends on thousands of Magistrates applying the Section 17 inquiry in the same way. A common protocol drawn up with judicial-training expertise is meant to close that gap and to keep voluntary adult sex workers out of intrusive custody while protecting those who are coerced.
By insisting that the inquiry be held in every case, whatever the rescued adult says, the Court keeps a safeguard against tutored or coerced statements. The next hearing will test how far States have met the earlier directions.
Case Title: Prajwala v. Union of India [M.A. No. 530/2022 in W.P.(C) No. 56/2004]
Bench: Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan, Supreme Court of India
Date of Order: October 13, 2026
Appearances: Senior Advocate Aparna Bhat (petitioner); ASG Aishwarya Bhati (Union of India)
If you know a child who is in need of help or protection, CHILDLINE (1098) is available round the clock.