Sale And Procurement Of Minors
Legal Framework
The sale and procurement of minors involve criminal acts where minors are unlawfully bought, sold, or procured for purposes like forced labor, sexual exploitation, trafficking, or other illegal activities. This is a grave violation of child rights and is addressed by multiple statutes and constitutional provisions in India.
Key laws addressing this are:
Indian Penal Code (IPC) Sections 370 & 370A: Related to trafficking of persons, including minors.
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015: Protects children from exploitation.
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012: Addresses sexual abuse and exploitation.
Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956: Deals with trafficking and exploitation.
Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986: Prohibits hazardous child labor.
Core Elements of Offence
Sale of Minor: Transfer of minor from one person to another for consideration.
Procurement of Minor: Obtaining or enticing a minor for unlawful purposes.
Purpose: Typically for exploitation, trafficking, forced labor, or prostitution.
Consent: Irrelevant; minors cannot consent legally to such acts.
Important Case Laws on Sale and Procurement of Minors
Case 1: Bachpan Bachao Andolan v. Union of India (2011) 5 SCC 1
Facts: Public Interest Litigation highlighting trafficking and exploitation of children.
Issue: Need for stringent measures to curb sale and trafficking of minors.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court directed the government to strengthen anti-trafficking laws and implement rescue and rehabilitation programs for victims.
Emphasized prevention, rescue, and strict punishment for traffickers.
Significance: Landmark case reinforcing the State's responsibility in preventing trafficking and protecting minors.
Case 2: State of Rajasthan v. Om Prakash (2009) 12 SCC 697
Facts: Accused involved in the sale and trafficking of minor girls for prostitution.
Issue: Whether procurement for prostitution amounts to trafficking and culpability of accused.
Judgment:
Court held that procurement of minor girls for prostitution is a serious offence attracting IPC Section 370 (trafficking).
Strong punishment awarded, reiterating zero tolerance for such offences.
Significance: Reinforced stringent interpretation of trafficking laws protecting minors from exploitation.
Case 3: Nipun Saxena & Anr v. Union of India & Ors, (2020) SCC OnLine SC 1001
Facts: PIL seeking reforms to prevent trafficking and ensure proper rehabilitation of rescued minors.
Issue: Effectiveness of laws in addressing sale and procurement of minors.
Judgment:
Supreme Court underscored the need for coordinated efforts among police, judiciary, and child welfare committees.
Directed better monitoring of rehabilitation homes and speedy trial of traffickers.
Significance: Focused on systemic reforms and accountability in handling minor trafficking cases.
Case 4: State of Tamil Nadu v. Suhas Katti, AIR 2004 SC 1579
Facts: Involved procurement of minor girls for forced labor and sexual exploitation.
Issue: Interpretation of trafficking under IPC Section 370A and related offences.
Judgment:
The Court held that any act of procurement of minor for exploitation, irrespective of consent, is punishable.
The severity of punishment depends on the nature of exploitation.
Significance: Clarified scope of trafficking offences involving minors.
Case 5: People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India (1982) AIR 1473
Facts: PIL regarding exploitation of child labor and trafficking.
Issue: State's duty to prevent exploitation including sale and procurement of minors.
Judgment:
The Court mandated the State to take effective measures to prevent child trafficking and protect minors from exploitation.
Affirmed children’s right to free and compulsory education as a protective measure.
Significance: Highlighted preventive role of State in protecting minors against trafficking and exploitation.
Case 6: Union of India v. G. Ganayutham (1997) 6 SCC 241
Facts: Related to the interpretation of “forced labour” and trafficking of minors.
Issue: Whether sale and procurement for forced labor attract IPC Section 370.
Judgment:
Supreme Court held that sale or procurement of minors for forced labor is trafficking.
Reinforced need for stringent punishment under trafficking laws.
Significance: Extended interpretation of trafficking to cover forced labor involving minors.
Summary Table
| Case Name | Key Legal Principle | Outcome & Significance |
|---|---|---|
| Bachpan Bachao Andolan v. Union | State responsibility to prevent trafficking | Directed stronger anti-trafficking measures |
| State of Rajasthan v. Om Prakash | Procurement of minors for prostitution = trafficking | Affirmed strict punishment under IPC 370 |
| Nipun Saxena v. Union of India | Systemic reforms & rehabilitation | Emphasized coordination and accountability |
| State of Tamil Nadu v. Suhas Katti | Trafficking includes all procurement for exploitation | Broadened scope of trafficking offences involving minors |
| People's Union for Democratic Rights | State duty to protect children from trafficking | Directed protective and preventive measures |
| Union of India v. G. Ganayutham | Forced labor as form of trafficking | Strengthened anti-trafficking laws for forced labor cases |
Conclusion
The sale and procurement of minors are recognized as serious crimes under Indian law with strict penalties.
The Supreme Court has consistently held that minors cannot consent to trafficking or exploitation, and all such acts are punishable under IPC Sections 370/370A and other child protection laws.
The Courts have repeatedly emphasized the State's duty to protect minors through strong preventive, punitive, and rehabilitative measures.
Judicial activism has pushed for better enforcement, monitoring, and speedy justice in cases involving trafficking of minors.
Rehabilitation and protection of victims are as crucial as prosecution of offenders.
RELATED Blog
0 comments