Despite the 1976 Act, bonded labour persists in India. Examine the gaps in identification and rehabilitation, and suggest reforms.

Article 23 bans forced labour. The Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 made bondage a crime [2]. Yet debt bondage survives in brick kilns, farms and other informal work. In November 2026, the Supreme Court held that release "cannot be treated as the completion of the State's obligation" [1]. The Act fails at two points: finding victims and rebuilding their lives.

Gaps in identification

• Weak vigilance committees: the Act sets up committees at district and sub-division level to identify bonded labourers [2]. Yet the Court named weak identification as a core failure [1].
• Perverse incentive: each case found proves that bondage exists in a district. Officials therefore gain little by looking.
• Demand-driven funding: the Centre releases money only when a State sends a proposal [3]. States that do not survey send none, so their victims stay invisible. This happens even though there is a survey grant of Rs 4.5 lakh per sensitive district every three years [3].

Gaps in rehabilitation

• Conviction condition: immediate aid is up to Rs 30,000 [3]. The larger rehabilitation assistance of Rs 1–3 lakh is paid only after the accused is convicted [3][4]. Trials take years, and an acquittal means no money at all.
• Witness pressure: the survivor's payment depends on the trial's outcome. This gives employers a reason to intimidate or buy off the witness.
• Thin budget: a Rs 10 crore yearly estimate pays for only about 1,000 basic cases nationwide. Tamil Nadu alone rehabilitated 1,016 people in 2021-22 [2].
• Delays: late payments push freed workers back into debt. The Court had to order subsistence support to cover this gap [1].

Reforms

• Delink payment from conviction: use the release certificate to trigger payment. This matches NHRC Advisory 2.0's call to end delays in benefits [6].
• Make the 7-day norm work: frame the uniform procedure the Court directed [1]. Back it with a refilled district Bonded Labour Rehabilitation Fund (corpus of at least Rs 10 lakh) [3].
• Link the budget to caseload: the Court asked the Centre to consider revising the scheme within three months [1]. Higher payouts must come with higher allocations and a separate subsistence-support head.
• Proactive identification: hold regular surveys, revive vigilance committees and enforce NHRC monitoring [5][6].

The law exists; bonded labour persists because release is not followed by rehabilitation. Paying aid without waiting for conviction, funding the 7-day norm and rewarding identification would put the 1976 Act into practice. This would honour Article 21's promise of life with dignity and SDG target 8.7 on ending forced labour.