Delhi court refuses bail to child trafficking accused

A Delhi court has denied bail to a man accused of being part of an inter-State child trafficking racket, saying that trafficking of infants is a “heinous scourge” that assaults the moral conscience of civilised society.

Additional Sessions Judge Hargurvarinder Singh Jaggi was hearing the bail application filed by Raj Kumar, who was accused in a case registered in connection with the alleged trafficking of a newborn girl born to an unmarried rape survivor.

In an order dated August 3, the court said, “Child trafficking is a heinous scourge and an onslaught on the moral conscience of civilised society. This court must record its deepest concern regarding the menace of child trafficking and the commodification of infants.

“Children are the most vulnerable and precious members of our collective society, and their lives, liberty and dignity cannot be subjected to a commercial market.”

According to the prosecution, the case surfaced after information was received from the Special Police Unit for Women and Children regarding the illegal adoption and trafficking of a baby girl born to an 18-year-old rape survivor at Safdarjung Hospital in November 2023.

A hospital housekeeping assistant allegedly persuaded the victim’s family to give away the child in exchange for money, following which Rs 50,000 was transferred to the victim’s uncle through UPI.

The investigation alleged that the infant was subsequently passed through multiple accused before reaching Raj Kumar and his wife Sunita alias Soniya, who allegedly kept the child for a day and sold her to another accused for Rs 1.65 lakh. The baby was then allegedly sold onward for Rs 1.75 lakh.

Police further claimed that two other trafficked infant girls were rescued from Mumbai in February this year, while one child had died due to illness. The complainant’s newborn daughter, however, is yet to be traced. Three co-accused have been declared proclaimed offenders, the court noted.

The defence argued that Raj Kumar had been falsely implicated merely because he was the husband of a co-accused, that no recovery had been made from him, and the chargesheet had already been filed. It also submitted that he had voluntarily appeared before the court and was not absconding.

Opposing the plea, the prosecution contended that Raj Kumar was an active conspirator in a commercial enterprise trafficking newborn infants and that his wife was a habitual offender involved in four similar cases. It argued that his release could jeopardise the ongoing investigation, particularly when the missing infant was yet to be recovered.

Rejecting the plea, the court said the material on record prima facie indicated that the applicant was not a passive bystander but had actively conspired to purchase and sell the newborn for profit.

“Targeting young, impoverished and defenceless mothers, such as the complainant R, who herself was a minor POCSO victim, to strip them of their newborn babies for financial greed is an act of unspeakable cruelty,” the judge said.

The judge further held that while personal liberty under Article 21 was a cherished constitutional value, it was not absolute and must give way where public safety was at stake.

“In child trafficking syndicates, a lenient or casual approach at the bail stage severely compromises public safety and risks letting repeat offenders loose to prey on more defenceless children,” the court said.

The judge said that the societal concern and the collective cry for the protection of innocent children must outweigh the individual liberty of the applicant in the face of such overwhelming and grave allegations.

Considering that the complainant’s infant remained missing, three accused were absconding and the applicant’s wife had previous involvement in similar offences, the court said granting bail at this stage could derail the investigation, intimidate witnesses and increase the risk of the accused absconding or repeating the offence.