SC Guidelines on Child Trafficking Evidence: Protecting Victim Testimony

Source: The Hindu 

Introduction 

In December 2025, the Supreme Court delivered a significant judgment addressing the "deeply disturbing reality" of child trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation in India. Justice Bagchi, authoring the judgment, observed that despite protective laws, child trafficking continues to flourish through organized criminal cartels operating with complex, layered structures across various stages of recruitment, transportation, harboring, and exploitation. 

• The judgment established comprehensive guidelines for appreciating evidence in child trafficking cases, emphasizing that courts must not disbelieve a trafficked child's testimony merely because of minor inconsistencies.  

What is the Nature of Child Trafficking Networks? 

Structural Characteristics: 

• Organized crime activities operate as apparently independent verticals whose insidious intersections are conveniently veiled through subterfuge and deception to hoodwink innocent victims. 
• Networks have complex and layered structures operating at various levels of recruiting, transporting, harboring, and exploiting minor victims. 
• Crime verticals operate in areas of recruitment, transportation, harboring, and exploitation, making it difficult for victims to narrate with precision and clarity the interplay of these processes. 

Operational Reality: 

• The diffused and apparently disjoint manner in which these crime verticals operate creates challenges for victim testimony. 
• Victims should not be faulted for failure to protest promptly against organized crime networks. 
• Such crimes operate through complex, layered structures that often mislead minors. 

What are the Key Guidelines for Courts? 

Treatment of Victim Testimony: 

• A trafficked child must not be treated as an accomplice by the courts. 
• Her deposition is to be given due regard and credence as that of an injured witness. 
• A victim's sole testimony must suffice if her version appeared to be credible and convincing. 
• A conviction can rest on the sole testimony of the victim if it is credible and convincing.A trafficking victim's testimony deserves the same weight as that of an injured witness. 

Handling Minor Inconsistencies: 

• Courts must not disbelieve the testimony of a trafficked child just because of minor inconsistencies in her evidence. 
• Minor inconsistencies should not be grounds for discarding victim evidence. 
• The testimony must be evaluated with sensitivity to the trauma and circumstances of the victim. 

What Judicial Considerations must Courts Apply? 

Socio-Economic and Cultural Vulnerability: 

• The child's socio-economic and cultural vulnerability, especially if from a marginalised or backward community, must be considered. 
• Courts must bear in mind the victim's inherent socio-economic and, at times, cultural vulnerability when the minor belongs to a marginalized or socially and culturally backward community. 
• Judicial appreciation of the victim's evidence must be marked by sensitivity and realism. 

Sensitivity and Realism: 

• Judicial consideration of a minor's testimony must be sensitive and avoid secondary victimisation. 
• Courts have been asked to bear in mind several key points while recording the evidence of a minor trafficking victim. 
• Courts must recognize the vulnerabilities that prevent victims from protesting promptly. 

Conclusion 

• The Supreme Court's judgment represents a landmark development in India's approach to combating child trafficking. By establishing that trafficked children must be treated as injured witnesses rather than accomplices, and that their testimony deserves credence despite minor inconsistencies, the Court has addressed a critical gap in the criminal justice system. 
• Justice Bagchi's emphasis on judicial sensitivity, recognition of socio-economic vulnerabilities, and understanding of the complex, layered nature of trafficking networks provides courts with a framework that balances evidentiary standards with the realities faced by trafficking victims. 
• This judgment acknowledges that child trafficking is not just a crime but a "deeply disturbing reality" that strikes at the foundation of human dignity. As India continues its fight against organized trafficking networks, these guidelines ensure that the voices of vulnerable child victims are heard, believed, and given the weight they deserve in the pursuit of justice. The ruling reinforces that the state's constitutional obligation to protect children from harm must be matched by a judicial system that treats their testimony with the sensitivity and credibility it merits.