The petitioner, represented by Senior Advocate Aparna Bhat, argued that there is currently no institutional framework to effectively address human trafficking and called for strengthening the existing system.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court today (18th Dec) reserved its judgment on a petition seeking the creation of a comprehensive rehabilitation framework and the strengthening of victim protection protocols for victims of sex trafficking.
A Bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan emphasized that the matter would be treated with utmost seriousness to ensure the protection of the victims’ rights.
Justice Pardiwala assured,
“We are assuring you that we would be taking it very seriously. We have to protect the society. We have to protect the victims. We will try our level best to do that,” while addressing Senior Advocate Aparna Bhat, representing the petitioner, Prajwala, a non-profit organization.
The Court was considering an application for compliance with a 2015 decision in which the Centre’s stance on forming the Organised Crime Investigating Agency (OCIA) and strengthening victim protection protocols for sex trafficking victims was noted.
During Previous Hearing
Earlier hearings had highlighted the severe impact of human and sex trafficking, particularly on vulnerable sections of society, with a focus on the disproportionate effect on women and children. The Court had underscored the need for enhanced support mechanisms to protect the rights and dignity of these groups.
The petitioner, represented by Senior Advocate Aparna Bhat, argued that there is currently no institutional framework to effectively address human trafficking and called for strengthening the existing system.
Bhat also noted the establishment of Anti-Trafficking Units by the Ministry of Home Affairs in 2016 but highlighted challenges in their functionality, including their lack of police status in some areas, which hindered the registration of FIRs and proper investigation.
Bhat contended that the Central government cannot retract its 2015 commitment to establishing the OCIA.
During the hearing, the Court questioned the Union’s compliance with a 2015 order.
The 2015 order had directed the Ministry of Home Affairs to establish the “Organized Crime Investigative Agency” (OCIA) by September 30, 2016, to handle trafficking cases. However, the Ministry of Women & Child Development (MW&CD) later introduced the Trafficking of Persons (Prevention, Protection, and Rehabilitation) Bill, 2018, which passed in the Lok Sabha but lapsed when the 16th Lok Sabha dissolved.
In response to the Court’s order, the Union filed an affidavit stating that instead of setting up a new agency, the National Investigation Agency (NIA) would handle human trafficking cases, with the NIA Act amended in 2019 to include relevant sections of the IPC.
Bhat highlighted non-compliance in two areas: the Union’s failure to establish the OCIA and its shift in stance regarding the need for a new agency, arguing that the NIA had not effectively handled trafficking cases.
She also pointed out that the Trafficking of Persons Bill, 2021 had made no legislative progress. While the NIA had been assigned the task, Bhat argued that it had only investigated around 10 cases, far fewer than the estimated 1,000 cases in need of attention.
Bhat further pointed out that, despite promises to trace the money involved in trafficking using laws like the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, the Union had backed away from its commitment. The Union also argued that comprehensive legislation might not be necessary due to provisions in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2024, which includes sections on organized crime.
Today’s Hearing
Justice Pardiwala questioned how the Court could compel the Union to enact legislation, to which Bhat responded that such action was not within the Court’s power. The hearing concluded by exploring ways to strengthen the existing system, with Bhat suggesting the creation of a specialized agency to address sex trafficking comprehensively.
The Union, represented by Bhati, countered that the BNS provisions, along with supplementary schemes, were sufficient to address trafficking. Bhati also cited the functionality of 827 anti-trafficking units, the establishment of 14,000 women’s helplines, and multi-agency crime centers for cross-border information sharing.
She also mentioned the operation of 827 Anti-Trafficking Units across the country, with some NGOs involved.
Additionally, Bhati noted that the Union had allocated funds for victim compensation and provided support for shelter homes under the Shakti-Sadan scheme.
Bhat raised concerns about merging shelter homes for trafficking victims with those for correctional purposes, especially considering that some victims are HIV-positive.
She emphasized the need for separate facilities, referencing the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, which distinguishes between protective homes and corrective institutions. Justice Pardiwala noted that while the Act allows for the establishment of such homes, it does not mandate it.
In response, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, representing the government, pointed out that the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) law includes adequate provisions for addressing sex trafficking crimes.
After hearing both parties, the Court reserved its judgment.
Case Title: PRAJWALA v. UNION OF INDIA, MA 530/2022 in W.P.(C) No. 56/2004
