R v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr & other connected matter, 2025
This ruling sets a precedent for including child trafficking inquiries in any case where the child’s custody is unclear or unverified, especially where abuse is involved.
Judgement Details
Court
Delhi High Court
Date of Decision
24 September 2025
Judges
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma
Citation
Acts / Provisions
Facts of the Case
-
A minor girl, around six years old, was found living with her adoptive parents in Delhi.
-
The child was subjected to severe physical abuse, including burn injuries, and sexually assaulted by the adoptive father.
-
During the trial, no investigation was conducted into the legality of the adoption or how the minor came into their custody.
-
The biological parents were not traced, and no adoption papers or procedure were presented.
-
The court raised strong concerns about a possible case of child trafficking or illegal custody.
Issues
-
Whether the conviction of the adoptive parents under JJ Act, IPC, and POCSO was justified based on the evidence?
-
Whether the lack of investigation into adoption or trafficking amounted to a serious procedural lapse?
-
Whether the minor was possibly a victim of child trafficking, beyond cruelty and sexual assault?
Judgement
-
The Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of the adoptive parents for:
-
Cruelty to a child under Section 75 JJ Act,
-
Voluntarily causing hurt under Section 323 IPC, read with Section 34 IPC,
-
Rape and sexual assault under Section 376 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act (adoptive father).
-
-
The Court criticized the investigating agency and Trial Court for failing to explore how the child came into custody of the accused.
-
The Court held that a larger issue of possible child trafficking was entirely overlooked.
Held
-
The Conviction of both adoptive parents affirmed.
-
The adoptive father remains convicted for rape and aggravated sexual assault.
-
The investigative lapse in failing to trace biological parents or verify adoption procedures was strongly condemned.
-
The case should have been treated as one involving potential human trafficking from the outset.
Analysis
-
The Court emphasized the need to view such cases beyond individual abuse, highlighting systemic risks like trafficking and illegal custody.
-
The judgment is a strong critique of police and judicial oversight, particularly the failure to trace the origin of the child or follow adoption protocol.
-
The Court acknowledged that the victim's young age and unverified custody made her uniquely vulnerable to repeated abuse.
-
Legal Implication: This ruling sets a precedent for including child trafficking inquiries in any case where the child’s custody is unclear or unverified, especially where abuse is involved.
-
The judgment sends a strong signal for reforming investigative approaches to child abuse and trafficking cases.