Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(SC) 1106

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.B. Pardiwala, K.V. Viswanathan, JJ
Pinki – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Application No. 729/2025 | Crl.A. No. 1927/2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Aparna Bhat, Mayank Sapra, Karishma Maria, Lalima Das, Gopal Krishna
For the Respondents: Garvesh Kabra, Vikas Bansal, Pooja Kabra, Nikita Kabra Jaju, Ankur Agnihotri, Shubhangi Tuli, Sanjai Kumar Pathak, Shashi Pathak, Arvind Kumar Tripathi, Robin Kumar, Shweta Jayshankar Dwivedi, Varinder Kumar Sharma, Mukesh Kumar Maroria, Mukesh Kr. Verma, Indira Bhakar, Santosh Ramdurg, Yogesh Vats, Shreekant Neelappa Terdal, Avijit Mani Tripathi, T.k. Nayak, Marbiang Khongwir, Aditya Kumar, Sameer Abhyankar, Yachna Sharma, Arushi Chopra, Eliza Barr, Disha Singh, Nidhi Mittal, Jaya Choudhary, Aravindh S., Anika Bansal, Aman Panwar, Naveen Sharma, Swati Bhushan Sharma, S.k. Sharma, Abhinav Kumar, Manav Kaushik, Payal Gola, P. I. Jose, Prashant Shrikant Kenjale, Ahantham Henry, Ahantham Rohen Singh, Mohan Singh, Aniket Rajput, Khoisnam Nirmala Devi, Yeshu Mehha, Tanay Hegde, Kumar Mihir, Yashvardhan, Apoorv Shukla, Prabhleen A. Shukla, Amit Sharma, K. V. Bharathi Upadhyaya, Pritama, Shaivani Gupta, Sunita, Bipin Vinayak Chandan, Sufyan Hasan, Hema Malik, Gopal Jha, Shrieesha Sharma, Tilak Vij, Sawan Datta, Nimish Arjaria, Shreyash Bhardwaj, Umesh Kumar Yadav, Abhikalp Pratap Singh, Aagam Kaur, Kartikey, Kashish Jain, Siddharth Garg, Enakshi Mukhopadhyay Siddhanta, Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, Karun Sharma, Anupama Ngangom, Rajkumari Divyasana

State authorities are mandatorily required to comply with judicial directives aimed at curbing child trafficking and ensuring victim rehabilitation. Failure to implement recommendations, report status, or expedite judicial proceedings constitutes a serious lapse, attracting strict judicial oversight and potential contempt proceedings to enforce compliance.

Headnote:(A) Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulations) Act, 2021 - Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 - Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 - Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 - Information Technology Act, 2000 - Criminal Law - Child trafficking and illegal child labour - Compliance with judicial directives - The court expressed serious dissatisfaction with authorities for failure to submit compliance reports regarding anti-trafficking measures, compensation for victims, and the implementation of specific expert recommendations - Authorities are mandated to establish review committees for vulnerable areas, ensure victim compensation, and adhere to strict timelines for trials. (Paras 3, 4, 14, 15)

(B) Judicial Accountability - Monitoring of compliance - High Courts are tasked with ensuring the status of pending trials is accounted for and that judicial circulars to prioritize day-to-day trials are strictly enforced to meet the mandated six-month disposal period. (Paras 4, 12, 22)

Facts of the case:
Following previous directions to curb child trafficking and ensure rehabilitation, the court reviewed compliance reports from various state authorities. A significant number of states failed to provide mandatory reports, and those that did were deemed insufficient. Evidence emerged of ongoing trafficking networks, illegal medical procedures related to reproductive services, and a failure to pass victim compensation orders despite specific mandates.

Findings of Court:
The court held that current efforts by state authorities are inadequate and characterized as an 'eye wash'. It emphasized the necessity of a holistic, multi-sectoral strategy, including the constitution of review committees, systematic data collection at the local level, and strict enforcement of legislative provisions regarding human trafficking and reproductive technology misuse.

Issues: The main issues were the widespread non-compliance by state authorities with prior binding directions regarding anti-trafficking protocols, the lack of victim compensation orders, the failure of the judiciary to expedite trials within the stipulated timeframe, and the need for stricter regulation of assisted reproductive technologies.

Ratio Decidendi: Non-compliance with explicit judicial directives for public interest and the protection of vulnerable children constitutes a severe dereliction of duty, necessitating strict oversight and the possibility of contempt proceedings to ensure the enforcement of legal safeguards and the fundamental rights of victims.

Result: Compliance reports ordered; review committees to be constituted; status information for pending trials required from defaulting authorities; matter adjourned for further monitoring.

Table of Content
1. mandatory compliance with sc directions on child trafficking. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. standardization of compliance reporting on bird recommendations. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
3. duty of state/courts to award compensation to trafficking victims. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
4. requirement for state-level review committees on trafficking. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
5. need for enforcement of art act to prevent commercialization. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21)
6. monitoring high courts for timely disposal of trafficking cases. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25)

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

1. The matter has come up before us today for reporting compliance of various directions issued by us vide our Judgment and Order dated 15.04.2025 in Criminal Appeal No.1927/2025. We had directed all the State Governments to report compliance of our directions.

2. We take notice of the fact that so far, the following State Governments have not forwarded and placed their reports on record:-

LIST OF STATES/UTs WHO HAVE NOT FILED ANY COMPLIANCE AFFIDAVIT/STATUS REPORT TILL DATE

S. No.	State/UT who have not filed compliance affidavit/status report as on 25.02.2026
1.	Andhra Pradesh
2.	Bihar
3.	Gujarat
4.	Himachal Pradesh
5.	Jharkhand
6.	Madhya Pradesh
7.	Nagaland
8.	Rajasthan
9.	Tamil Nadu
10.	Telangana
11.	Uttarakhand
12.	West Bengal
13.	Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu
14.	Lakshadweep

3. We take a serious view of the matter insofar as all those State Governments who have failed to furnish their compliance reports till this date.

4. Even those State Governments who have placed their compliance reports on record, we are not at all satisfied with the contents of the same. Whatever has been reported is nothing but an eye wash. We would like to remind all the State Governments of our directions as contained in paragraph ‘81’ of the main judgment. Directions reads thus:-

a. We direct the Chief Judicial Magistrate District Varanasi and the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No. 5 District Varanasi to commit all the three criminal cases referred to in para 9 of this judgment to the sessions court, within a period of two weeks from today without fail.

b. Upon all the three criminal cases being committed to the court of sessions, the concerned trial court shall proceed to frame charge against individual accused persons within a period of one week thereafter.

c. If it is brought to the notice of the trial court that some of the accused persons have absconded or their whereabouts are not known, the trial court shall take steps immediately to secure their presence by issuing non-bailable warrant etc. The trial of the absconding accused shall be separated in accordance with law so that the trial of the other co-accused persons do not get delayed.

d. Once the charge is framed by the trial court in individual cases, the concerned trial court shall proceed with the recording of the evidence preferably on day-to-day basis and complete the proceedings of the trial within a period of six months.

e. We direct the State Government to appoint three special public prosecutors for the purpose of conducting of the trials well versed in criminal trials at the earliest.

f. We also direct the State Government to provide police protection to the victims and their families pending the trial at the earliest so as to prevent tampering of the evidence.

g. We grant two months’ time to the State Police to trace out all those accused persons who have absconded and are on the run. They shall be apprehended and produced before the court concerned at the earliest.

h. We direct the State Government to ensure that the trafficked children are admitted in schools in accordance with the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and continue to provide support for their education.

i. At the end of the trial, the concerned trial court shall pass appropriate orders as regards compensati

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(SC) 1106

SUPREME COURT OF INDIAJ.B. Pardiwala, K.V. Viswanathan, JJPinki – AppellantVersusState of Uttar Pradesh – RespondentMiscellaneous Application No. 729/2025 | Crl.A. No. 1927/2025

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.B. Pardiwala, K.V. Viswanathan, JJ
Pinki – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Application No. 729/2025 | Crl.A. No. 1927/2025