·The Hindu·15 marks·250–350 wordsPolitySocietyDefence

Examine the administrative and federal challenges in implementing a uniform, nationwide victim protection protocol for trafficking survivors across Indian states.

In this answer
  1. Federal challenges
  2. Administrative challenges

In Prajwala v. Union of India (2026 INSC 609), the Supreme Court framed a six-stage nationwide Victim Protection Plan — pre-rescue to prosecution — anchored in Articles 21 and 23 [1]. Its promise of uniformity, however, collides with the reality that trafficking response is delivered by states through varied police and welfare machinery.

Federal challenges

  • Police and public order are State subjects (Seventh Schedule, List II); the Centre only advises and funds, so a uniform protocol depends on 28 states and 8 UTs voluntarily converging [2].
  • Uneven institutional capacity: AHTUs exist across districts but differ widely in staffing, training and functioning; the Court's mandate of a DSP-rank head and at least two women officers per AHTU strains thinly-staffed state cadres [1][2].
  • Inter-state trafficking routes demand source–transit–destination coordination for repatriation and reintegration, yet jurisdictional handovers between state police forces remain slow [2].
  • Fiscal dependence: central assistance for AHTUs and the Ujjawala shelter-and-rehabilitation scheme is centrally designed but state-implemented, producing patchy coverage of protective homes [3].

Administrative challenges

  • Multi-department convergence: AHTUs must integrate police with Women & Child Development, Health, Labour and Prosecution — a classic coordination bottleneck where accountability diffuses [1][2].
  • Attitudinal and legal contradiction: the ruling bars detaining rescued persons in police stations and treats them as victims, but ITPA Sections 7, 8 and 20 still enable their penalisation, so front-line officers face conflicting mandates until Parliament amends the Act [4].
  • Rights-based delivery: informed consent, privacy and non-stigmatisation require trained counsellors, legal aid and long-term reintegration support that most district administrations currently lack [1].

Uniformity of standards need not mean uniformity of machinery. A cooperative-federal route — model state SOPs, capacity-building grants, an inter-state AHTU coordination platform, and legislative cure of the ITPA's victim-criminalising provisions — can convert judicial direction into administrative practice, realising the constitutional promise of dignity under Articles 21 and 23.

Sources

  1. 1Prajwala v. Union of India, 2026 INSC 609 (Supreme Court of India, 29 May 2026)Victim Protection Plan, six stages, Article 21/23 basis, AHTU composition, non-detention of rescued persons
  2. 2Ministry of Home Affairs, Anti-Trafficking Section (AHTUs and advisories to States)police/public order as State subjects, AHTU coverage, multi-department task-force design, central funding
  3. 3PIB, Ministry of Women and Child Development — Rehabilitation of Victims of Human TraffickingUjjawala scheme, protective and rehabilitative homes
  4. 4The Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, India Code_1956.pdf) — Sections 7, 8 and 20 enabling penalisation of victims
Practice
10 questions on this article
Check the answer for each question, or reveal all at once.
Practice MCQs →

More from this note

More on Polity