SC ORDERS REINSTATEMENT OF VARANASI SANITATION WORKERS FIRED AFTER REPORTING CHILD TRAFFICKING CONCERNS:

The Supreme Court on Monday expressed strong disapproval after learning that a couple employed as sweepers had been removed from their jobs allegedly because they had approached the Court in a child trafficking case involving their own child. A Bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice KV Viswanathan is currently hearing a set of criminal appeals filed by families whose children had been trafficked within Uttar Pradesh. During the hearing on December 2, Senior Advocate and Amicus Curiae Aparna Bhat informed the Court that Pinki and her husband, who were working as sweepers through a contractor at the Dashashwamedh Ward of the Varanasi Municipal Corporation, had been suddenly terminated.

The couple had approached the Supreme Court after their one-year-old child was allegedly kidnapped in 2023. They challenged the bail granted by the Allahabad High Court to persons accused of involvement in the trafficking network. The Bench recalled that during earlier hearings it had already questioned why State authorities had not taken steps to challenge those bail orders, especially given the seriousness of the allegations. The termination of the couple’s employment was viewed by the Court as an act that appeared linked to their decision to pursue the matter before the Supreme Court. The Bench noted that the action seemed to be taken due to official displeasure concerning the Court’s close scrutiny of the case.

Taking serious exception to the development, the Court observed that terminating the services of two employees merely because they invoked their legal remedies was distressing. The judges remarked that it was especially concerning because the Court itself had been monitoring the matter, having taken cognizance of wider issues relating to child trafficking. According to the Court, removing the couple from service at a time when they were actively pursuing justice in relation to the kidnapping of their child amounted to retaliation by authorities rather than a legitimate administrative decision.

Upon being informed of the development, the Bench directed counsel for the State of Uttar Pradesh, Advocate Garvesh Kabra, to ensure that the couple be reinstated immediately. The Court further stated that this reinstatement must be done within a short, specified time frame, and on the same terms and conditions as applied prior to the termination. The Bench added that failure to comply with its direction would result in the responsible authority facing consequences, including the possibility of being placed under suspension. The Court also asked to be informed by the end of the day whether the couple had been taken back into service.

The larger matter before the Court relates to child trafficking rackets involving kidnapping, transporting, and selling of minor children. The appeals challenge bail orders granted by the Allahabad High Court, which had earlier released several accused persons. The High Court had granted bail on factors such as the accused not being named in the FIR and that names surfaced through statements of co-accused persons. However, many of those released later absconded, leading to re-arrest in some cases after intervention by the Supreme Court. The Bench previously termed the High Court’s approach callous and questioned why the State government failed to seek cancellation of bail at an appropriate stage.

The Supreme Court has passed broader directions in the matter, including ensuring expedited trials in trafficking cases and awarding compensation to victims. The Court also directed that in cases where trials are complete but compensation has not been ordered, the concerned trial courts must immediately issue appropriate orders. Further, State governments have been asked to examine recommendations contained in a report submitted by the Bharatiya Institute of Research and Development in April 2023, particularly those relevant to strengthening systemic responses to trafficking.