Telangana High Court Dismisses Habeas Corpus Petition, Upholds Protective Custody for Trafficking Victims

The Court emphasizes the State's duty to prevent re-victimization and ensure rehabilitation under Juvenile Justice Act framework.

In a significant judgment, the Telangana High Court has dismissed a Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Kamsani Anjali, seeking the release of two alleged detenues from the State Home, Madhura Nagar, Hyderabad. The detenues, Kamsani Purna and Kamsani Ammulu, both 19 years old, were victims of human trafficking, rescued in 2018 by the Yadagirigutta Police, and have been under protective custody since.

The Division Bench, comprising Justices Moushumi Bhattacharya and Gadi Praveen Kumar, concluded that the petitioner, claiming to be a 'next friend', failed to establish the necessary bona fides to maintain the petition. The Court emphasized that locus standi is critical in Habeas Corpus petitions, and in this case, the petitioner did not demonstrate the capacity to act as a responsible friend for the alleged detenues.

The judgment further clarified that the detention of the alleged detenues in the State Home does not qualify as illegal under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The Court noted that the protective custody was ordered by the Child Welfare Committee (CWC) and was within the statutory framework aimed at rehabilitation and protection from re-exploitation.

Highlighting the State's duty to protect victims of trafficking, the Court referenced Articles 21 and 39(f) of the Indian Constitution, emphasizing the need for continued protective custody to prevent re-victimization and ensure the integrity of pending trials where the detenues are material witnesses.

The Court also addressed the argument concerning the alleged detenues' attainment of adulthood, stating that it does not automatically necessitate their release if their welfare and rehabilitation are at risk. The judgment underscored the importance of structured aftercare and support systems, as envisaged by the Juvenile Justice Act.

The Court's decision underscores the balance between individual autonomy and the State's responsibility to safeguard victims of trafficking, ensuring their safety and rehabilitation within a legal and protective framework.

Bottom Line:

Writ of Habeas Corpus - Locus standi of the petitioner to maintain the petition questioned - Detention in State Home pursuant to orders under Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 does not amount to illegal detention - State's duty to care and protect victims of trafficking emphasized.

Statutory provision(s):  

• - Constitution of India, Article 226  
• - Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015  
• - Constitution of India, Articles 21, 39(f)  
• - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 143, 144

Kamsani Anjali v. State of Telangana, (Telangana)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2796085