Discuss the institutional framework for tracing missing children and countering human trafficking in India. What gaps remain?

Many cases of missing children turn out to be cases of trafficking, so tracing and anti-trafficking work are closely linked. India's response has several layers: court directions, specialised police units and shared databases. However, the framework is fragmented across ministries and short of capacity.

Institutional Framework

• Judicial push: In Bachpan Bachao Andolan v. UoI (WP(C) 75/2012), the Supreme Court made an FIR mandatory for every missing child. MHA links the later rise in recorded cases to better registration [1].
• Police-station level: The MHA advisory calls for a Child Welfare Officer in every police station, Special Juvenile Police Units (SJPUs) and data entry on the Track Child database [2].
• District level: Anti-Human Trafficking Units (AHTUs) are being extended to all districts, and Women Help Desks are being set up in police stations [3].
• Tracking: MWCD's Track Child portal and its Khoya-Paya citizen corner let people report missing and sighted children [4].
• Coordination: MHA's Cri-MAC (2020) lets agencies share crime information 24x7 [3].
• Rescue and rehabilitation: Under Operation Smile/Muskaan, police screened children at railway stations, shelters and streets [5]. Mission Vatsalya and the 1098 helpline support rescued children [3].

Gaps That Remain

• Fragmented data: Track Child is run by MWCD, while police crime records are under MHA. Without integration, the same child can sit unmatched in separate systems.
• Weak capacity: MHA still has to call for "strengthening existing AHTUs" [3], which shows that many units are not fully functional.
• Registration ≠ recovery: Mandatory FIRs increase the number of recorded cases [1]. Operation Muskaan shows that organised searching is what recovers children [5], but such drives are only occasional.
• Blanket FIRs for adults: Recent court directions have extended mandatory FIRs to adults. For 3–7-year offences, the BNSS allows a DSP-approved preliminary enquiry before registration [6], but that filter is now bypassed for missing adults. Adults who leave voluntarily may then take up officers' time that genuine trafficking cases need.
• Legal vacuum: The Trafficking of Persons Bill, 2018 passed the Lok Sabha but was never enacted, so India still has no comprehensive anti-trafficking law [7].

The building blocks exist: portals, specialised units and legal duties. What is missing is integration and follow-through. The way forward includes a unified MHA–MWCD database, AHTUs with dedicated staff, and a two-track SOP that keeps immediate FIRs for children while screening voluntary adult cases. A comprehensive anti-trafficking law would complete this. Together, these steps would advance SDG 16.2 (ending the trafficking of children) and protect children's right to life and dignity under Article 21.