“Courts Must Be Sensitive in Child Trafficking Cases,” Supreme Court Issues New Guidelines

New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India has described child trafficking and sexual exploitation as serious and deeply concerning crimes, and has issued crucial guidelines for lower courts to ensure sensitive handling of such cases. The apex court emphasized that minor inconsistencies in the testimony of minor victims should not be grounds for dismissal, and investigations must be conducted with utmost sensitivity.

Guidelines for Courts
A bench led by Justice Manoj Mishra highlighted that child trafficking is not an isolated phenomenon but a deeply entrenched and organized crime, continuing despite strict laws. The Supreme Court directed lower courts to protect the rights and dignity of minor victims and ensure justice without delay.

The guidelines were issued while upholding the conviction of a Bengaluru couple accused of trafficking a minor girl for prostitution. Both the trial court and the Karnataka High Court verdicts were affirmed, and the couple’s appeal was dismissed. The Supreme Court stressed that the testimony of a minor victim must be evaluated sensitively and with due regard for her dignity.

Victim-Centric Approach
The court warned against dismissing testimony due to minor discrepancies, inability to recall exact dates or locations, or societal prejudices regarding the victim’s behavior. Protecting the dignity and rights of children who have suffered sexual abuse is a fundamental responsibility of the judiciary.

The Supreme Court noted that such victims often belong to marginalized or economically disadvantaged communities. Trafficking networks operate in complex layers of recruitment, transport, lodging, and exploitation. If a minor victim cannot immediately protest or narrate the entire incident in detail, this should not undermine the credibility of her testimony.

Credibility of Testimony
The court further observed that repeatedly recounting sexual abuse during police and court proceedings is extremely traumatic for the victim, especially when she is a minor concerned about social stigma, revenge, or rehabilitation. The Supreme Court held that if, after careful assessment, the testimony appears credible, conviction can be based solely on it.

Case Background: Bengaluru, November 2010
The case arose from information received by an NGO about a minor girl being exploited in a rented house in Peenya, Bengaluru. Police conducted an operation and rescued the girl. In February 2025, the Karnataka High Court rejected the accused’s appeal, maintaining the sentence.

The Supreme Court clarified that school records should be the primary reference to determine the age of a minor victim, with medical or bone age tests serving only as alternatives. The court reiterated that in cases of child sexual abuse, sensitivity, a humane approach, and respect for the victim’s dignity are paramount.

Related