Summary: The court rejected a request filed by Kamsani Anjali, who wanted two alleged victims of human trafficking to be released from a State Home. The court decided that keeping them there was legal and best for their safety.
Kamsani Anjali, a 19-year-old student, asked the court to free two friends, Kamsani Purna and Kamsani Ammulu, claiming they were being held illegally at the State Home in Madhura Nagar, Hyderabad. Anjali argued that both were adults and should be allowed to leave.
The State, represented by several officials, argued that keeping them there was legal. The victims were rescued from a human trafficking situation in 2018 and were placed under the care of the Child Welfare Committee (CWC) for their safety and recovery.
"Letting them go would not be in their best interest since both were victims of human trafficking," said the government lawyer.
The court, led by Judges Moushumi Bhattacharya and Gadi Praveen Kumar, looked into whether the detention was illegal. They found that the victims were staying at the State Home because of valid orders by the CWC under the Juvenile Justice Act.
The court questioned Anjali's right to file the request. Although she said she was a friend, there was no proof that the victims saw her as one. The court stressed that a request like this requires the person filing it to have a clear and real connection to the people being held.
The court was worried that letting the victims go could put them in danger from traffickers. The victims are also important witnesses in ongoing trafficking and POCSO cases.
"The risk of the alleged victims being forced back into trafficking if released is real and cannot be ignored," the court noted.
The court decided that keeping the victims in the State Home was not illegal and highlighted the State's duty to protect them from being exploited again. The request was rejected, supporting the State's role in ensuring the safety and recovery of trafficking victims.
The court emphasized the importance of care and recovery for victims of trafficking, underlining the State's responsibility to provide a safe environment and support for their return to society.
"The State is required by law to provide support and resources to children who have grown up while being kept safe," the court stated.
This judgment shows the challenges involved in balancing personal freedom with the need for protection and recovery of vulnerable individuals.
