The Bombay High Court has emphasized that offences related to the anti-human trafficking law can lead to significant societal and cultural consequences.

The court has instructed the Central and Maharashtra governments to submit affidavits confirming whether the mechanisms outlined in the legislation are operational. 

On Wednesday the division bench consisting of Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyay and Justice Arif Doctor presided over Public Interest Litigation(PIL) initiated by the NGO ‘Rescue Foundation’. The PIL alleged that the authorities have not effectively enforced the provisions of the Immoral  Traffic (Prevention) Act.

In its order the bench acknowledged that the PIL has brought to light significant concerns regarding a situation that is far from satisfactory. It pointed out that the individuals charged under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act often evade the full extent of legal consequences.

Previously, the bench had received information from the Central government through an affidavit stating that offenses related to human trafficking for purposes of slavery and sexual exploitation, as defined in sections 370 and 370A of the Indian Penal Code, would be investigated by the National Investigation Agency (NIA). This decision was made because these crimes often have connections that extend across state borders and sometimes even involve international aspects.

On Wednesday, the court pointed out that the Central government had not addressed the other provisions of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act. The High Court noted that the Centre had not yet designated trafficking police officers to investigate offenses under the Act that pertain to the sexual exploitation of individuals and are alleged to have occurred in more than one state.

The High Court emphasized that due to the lack of designated trafficking police officers, offenses under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, which are reported to have occurred in multiple states, are likely to go uninvestigated. Therefore, the court stressed the urgent necessity for the appointment of trafficking police officers to address this issue.

The bench, taking into consideration the social and cultural implications of offenses under the Act, highlighted that the state government should consider whether the advisory bodies and "Anti-Human Trafficking Units" envisioned by the Act have been established and are actively performing their responsibilities.

The bench issued a directive to the Maharashtra government instructing them to submit a detailed affidavit that outlines the extent to which the  provisions of the Act are being enforced. Furthermore they were asked to specify the roles and responsibilities carried out by the Anti-Human Trafficking Units and Women Help Desks.

The High Court further stated that “The State government shall also indicate as to how many offences reported under Sections 370 and 370A of the Indian Penal Code in Maharashtra have been referred for investigation to the NIA”.

Additionally, the bench instructed the Central Government to submit an affidavit that provides information on the actions and measures it has taken to ensure the appointment of traffic police officers as mandated by the law. 

The bench has set a deadline of four weeks for the submission of the affidavits and scheduled the next hearing for December 4 to further review the matter.