Beyond 1976 ban: Expert on why 50 years later, India’s ‘broken’ justice system still fails millions in bonded labour

In this in-depth conversation, Dr Tina Kuriakose Jacob, breaks down the layers of the crisis—from the caste-based nature of the survivors to the critical overlap between the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and existing labour laws. She argues that, although the legislation exists, the “sensitivity of the system” remains the missing link in the fight for genuine freedom.

Edited excerpts follow.

The issue of bonded labour still persists in the country. Could you explain why?

Dr Jacob: Fifty years since the Act and we are still looking at only around 3 lakh people who have been released and rehabilitated from bonded labour, according to the Government of India.

This is right from 1978 to 2025. It’s good for us to revisit why this is happening. There are a couple of reasons why the issue persists.

There are some structural ways in which work happens in this country. Over 90 per cent of the workforces in the informal sector, where there is weak regulation, the work happens without contract and with a lot of verbal agreements. It’s also the kind of work where there is not much scrutiny happening in terms of compliance and matters of the state being involved closely with the way work happens in the sector.

I want to mention that 90 per cent of the victims of bonded labour who have been released and rehabilitated, whether going by the Ministry of Labour data or the NCRB (National Crime Records Bureau), belong to the SC/ST community.

They are socioeconomically marginalised communities with very low literacy, poor resources. There are push factors such as agrarian distress or lack of employment opportunities locally, or they may be just simple things happening like debts have increased because of sickness in the family or bettings or debts, which kind of makes people in a distress situation.

It’s in this situation of vulnerability that there is a layer of people who choose to make it their business in terms of illegal profits.

You have sometimes known people, sometimes middlemen who lure such vulnerable persons into false promises. They may even give them some money and say, “we’ll give you good jobs, take you to the city, take you to another state”, only for these people to later experience that the truth was very different and they are forced into situations of exploitation in terms of work.

This is happening to men, women, children. I think the other element as to why this crime continues, even to date, after so many years of the legislation, and in fact, many other legislations which have come by, is that ordinary citizens of our country, we don’t like to interact with the police and let alone people from this community. They are just happy if their wages are paid.

There is a lack of a victim-centric approach in our justice system. The justice system is broken in many ways to be able to address the justice needs of these people.

Looking at data is one thing, but sometimes we also need to look at stories and incidents. In recent circulation, there have been a lot of media reports about a young boy from Bihar who had missed his train and then he gets lured to go and work in a dairy farm with excruciating work hours. There are 30-35 cows or buffaloes that he has to care for.

He’s just 15-16 years old. For two months, he bears with it, and then he tries to run, he is caught and brought back, and beaten up and asked to continue to work. And in that process, by way of an accident, he happens to cut his arm in a grass-cutting, chaff-cutting machine.

This case has been picked up by the NHRC, suo motu. Justice partners like the NHRC and the police, they have had to step into this case, but the boy is disabled for life and waiting for justice.

The crime persists because of structural barriers to the kind of employment people are looking for and there are people who are profiteering from their vulnerability.

Has the definition of bonded labour evolved in the last 50 years? Does it now include gig workers, which can be an informal sector?

Dr Jacob: That’s a good question. The law by itself, it doesn’t have a sectoral approach at all. It does not have a gender lens, nor a caste or a class lens.

If we look at the preliminary sections of the law, there is an acknowledgement that people, at the time when the law was passed, they were being exploited under social customary norms, and it mentions about some of the traditional forms of bonded labour that were existent, and some of them which are even to date, like Kamaiya (a form of bonded labour in which a worker and their family entered into an informal contract with a landlord to do agricultural work in return for payment-in-kind) or Vettichakiri (a form of feudal, forced, and unpaid labor prevalent in the princely state of Hyderabad, particularly Telangana, during the Nizam’s rule).

What the law does is it clarifies some of the ingredients of what would be bonded labour, which is, there is an advance, there is a debt, a person is compelled to give their labour or services under such an advance, or it could even be an obligation that has come from a family having incurred an obligation, it could be customary obligation.

The compulsion to give labour or services in such a way that you are expected to continue to work even if you don’t get paid, or even if you don’t get paid enough. You are expected to work even though you want to actually leave the facility, even though you want to actually go and work somewhere.

There are many restrictions, like a restriction on your freedom to get employment, move around freely, or even restriction on if you are producing something, or if you are a fisherman who’s catching fish, you are being forced, and there was a case like that, an entire fishing village in Amaragiri (Telangana), where people were fishing, but they could not go and sell the fish wherever they wanted, they had to sell it only to a certain person. That was seen to be a case of bonded labour. So, it is not sectoral.

It definitely applies to some cases of modern-day factories. There have been cases of bonded labour found in the food processing industry, there have been cases in textile, garment, rice, and oil mills, apart from the familiar ones like brick kilns and construction and things like that, agricultural services, it’s there across varied sectors. I like your question about gig workers, and that’s a little bit of a tricky question for me. It is really timely for us to pick up that debate.

The economic survey recently said that there are over 70 lakh people already employed in the gig economy. That’s expected to grow to 2.34 crore, or something like that by 2030; that’s a large number of basically youth going to be involved in the gig economy.

It’s really a time for policymakers to think through what kind of jobs are going to be created. Are these going to be decent jobs that are going to be gainful and productive, not just for individuals, but for a sustainable and inclusive economy that we are looking to build? Whether it would be bonded labour or not, it’s not simple, because we can’t conclude it.

It’s easy for us to say so, but, by the time one gets to the court, they will need to prove whether it is a creditor-debtor or an employer-employee relationship, which, presently in the digital platform, the work and higher complexities around that, how those relationships work, how the expectations work, are something that needs to be broken down. One worker is working on multiple platforms.

It isn’t easy to say that bonded labour would also be applicable to gig workers directly. It is something we’ll have to think through. But definitely, the conditions, the working conditions, need some thinking through. Work hours, rest, these are basic rights of any worker, regardless of which sector they are in.

Let’s hope that the government bears these in mind, even as it’s looking to build jobs in the future.

With the Bharatiya Nyaya Sahinta being fully active now, do you think there is an overlap when it comes to perhaps Section 143 of the BNS and the provisions of the 1976 law? Could there be a dilution?

Dr Jacob: As far as legal overlap is concerned, there’s no problem in that. For example, in a child bonded labour case, when an FIR is filed, you will have charges not just under the Child Labour Protection Act, but you’ll have charges in the FIR under the Bonded Labour Act.

The Juvenile Justice Act also has provisions. If the child is from an SC/ST community, you can even add the SC/ST community Section 3 as part of the charges. When an FIR is filed, it tries to take cognisance of all the elements of the crime based on the nature of the victim involved and the nature of the crime committed.

Together with the crime of bonded labour, there must have been criminal intimidation or there would have been violence meted out against the victim. You would have additional pieces from the penal code added in the charges. Therefore, legal overlap is not a problem at all.

I would not go so far as to say dilution does occur. But what we need to understand, even as we are grappling with this question, is that the focus of what the BNS in terms of human trafficking is trying to do and what the BLSA is trying to do is slightly different.

When the BLSA, 1976, came out, we knew there was a certain transition; the economy was moving in a certain way. There were cases of customary bondage, all of those things. Like I said in the definitions earlier, it looks at many other factors which push a person to be compelled to give forced labour under conditions of debt advance and so on and so forth. The focus of the law is that the district administration, when it knows about such a case, the district administration sees that these people are a bigger sections of the society.

They are being economically and physically exploited under the BLSA. That the district administration is supposed to release them. They are supposed to declare that they actually were bonded, and a certificate is given.

And based on that release certificate, the government of India has created a government scheme for the rehabilitation of bonded labourers. They get some immediate cash assistance, and later on, they even get more cash depending on whether they are male, female, child, or whether there are elements, added elements of exploitation. But they also get access to other government schemes like the schemes for housing, for wage employment, for skill development, education for children and so on and so forth.

The BLSA says, once the person is released, even if they had debts or even if they had mortgaged their property to the owner, the owner cannot claim these debts to be paid or the owner has to actually give back the mortgage property. There is a very strong focus on the victims here. The element of punishment is very limited.

It’s up to three years of fine if the offender is found guilty of the offences. But mostly focused on the victim. If you look at the BNS, it is basically a replica of Section 370 IPC, human trafficking.

What it does instead, like any penal provision, is to ensure that whoever was involved in perpetrating the crime and different persons can be involved in human trafficking.

It talks about someone who may be recruiting, someone who may be harbouring, someone who may be transporting, and someone who then receives and then exploits the workers. The human trafficking definition is very broad under BNS in section 143.

It includes different forms. It’s not just forced labour. It talks about sexual exploitation, beggary, child pornography, and many different things.

But the focus is on addressing the criminal element and making sure that whoever is involved, big or small, middleman, agent, employer, recruiter, all of these people can be involved in it. It’s, in a sense, talking about how the crime is a lot more organised. There are networks involved in it and deterrence needs to be created by involving charges against each of these people who are causing this crime to be perpetrated.

A report suggests that in the seven years to 2023, there were about 400 bonded labourers who were rescued in 27 cases. But there were only two convictions in all those cases. Why is the conviction rate so low?

Dr Jacob: Before we look at conviction, I must say that the government of India has come out with a rehabilitation scheme where it showed its commitment not just to rehabilitation, but also to conviction, prosecution of offences under the Bonded Labour Act and related laws.

Full rehabilitation of victims is connected to convictions in cases, which is why it’s important for us to look at whether convictions are improving and what the nature of the convictions. Now, as you stated, it looks like conviction is very low.

And even if we look at the most recent NCRB report under BLSA, interestingly, of the over 200 cases that were completed, that completed trial in the court, the conviction rate is said to be around 76 per cent.

It’s particularly impressive compared to the conviction rate for human trafficking. Human trafficking is very low in terms of convictions. Forced labour, if it’s reported under BNS, would result in very low convictions because of the nature of evidence gathering, the police investigation, and the kind of scrutiny that comes in terms of building the prosecution for a higher offence.

In the penal court, human trafficking offence, the minimum punishment is seven years. If it involves minors, it’s 10 years. If it involves more people, it’s even more.

Depending on the severity of the punishment involved, the processes in the court also change.

Why is conviction low? There are many different reasons. We have done a study in the past where we looked at a couple of cases in different states, and we looked at judgments. And what was the view of judges in terms of the evidence that was gathered, the witnesses that were coming in to give statements? And one of the major things that comes out in a lot of cases where acquittals are happening is that the victims don’t want to testify simply because they’re being threatened and intimidated by the accused.

Unless there is actually strong police protection, unless the victims are empowered, and empowerment also happens by providing victims with timely rehabilitation. With the same cases that you’re talking about, there are thousands of cases, like there’s a recent case in the Supreme Court, Surendra Manju v. Union of India, where over 4,000 cases of child-bonded labour, they are still waiting for rehabilitation to come to them. There is no rehabilitation support.

Victims are intimidated. And on top of that, even the investigation that is done, the necessary documents or the evidence gathering is weak, especially if a case is between states, interstate trafficking cases.

Last but not least, the sensitivity of judges, even government officials, is very often right at the point of rescue, the complaint of bonded labour is not taken seriously sometimes. And it is said, “Arre, inko toh kaam mil gaya abhi kya hai? What’s the problem? (they have a job)”. “Let it be, it must be just a case of unhone paise liye hain (they have taken money, they have to give the money back”.

Just the understanding of what bonded labour is, how to treat victims, it seeps through the entire justice pipeline, right from the point of rescue to the point of how the case is even received before a judge. When victims give statements, the cases that run in court are there. They’re not happening in two to three years.

It takes seven to eight years for a court case to be completed. And by that time, if at all the victim is still coming to testify, he or she is worried about the work that they have lost their wages for that day. And they actually want to get it all done with.

And those who are powerful, those who have the resources, are able to work through the system and justice remains delayed for them.

Take us through the rescue and the rehabilitation process. What’s the role of the government in all this, and what does it do to make the law more effective?

Dr Jacob: It’s very noteworthy that sometime in 2017, the Ministry of Labour came out with a standard operating procedure (SOP), something that government departments very normally use as part of the administrative process to identify, rescue, rehabilitate bonded labourers and also prosecute cases. Now, when we look at the SOP, not many states follow it.

Training and sensitisation are critical if we want to show progress in the identification of bonded labour. But if the SOP is being followed, when a complaint is made, it has to be accepted by the DM (district magistrate), put into a written format and then an interdepartmental rescue team comes forward, helps with the rescue. As soon as a rescue happens, the victims and their families are in pretty deplorable condition.

Many of them are sick. They have not eaten well. They are not hydrated.

Medical care, food, etc, have to be immediately administered. Then the district administration is supposed to do a basic enquiry to find out if they were in bondage. It has to be done with the owner/employer away from them, because keeping them in a situation of intimidation does not help the process.

Once that process is completed and the district magistrate sees that there is a case of bonded labour, a release certificate has to be given within 24 hours of the rescue, as soon as possible.

The money, which is Rs 30,000 under the government scheme, has to be given to victims, not an entire family. Each victim of bonded labour has to get that money, including a child. From there on, the process starts, where if it’s an interstate case, the DM has to coordinate, the police have to coordinate with each other, written letters of coordination have to be written, so that there is a safe transfer of the victims.

The DM, in the meantime, also has to transfer the documents to the police to take it forward. If he or she sees it’s a primary case, then the police start getting involved and an FIR is formed.

We know of survivors who got their immediate cash assistance with a lot of help from social workers. They were integrated into some of the government schemes. A lot of them don’t have Aadhaar cards. They don’t have bank accounts.

Of the money they got, some started a small shop, a small roadside shop, or some of them started doing peanut farming. They may not earn a lot, but they at least know that we earn and we are not under threat and our children are safely going to school and coming back.
That dream is legitimate and I hope that someday India will allow all its people to taste that kind of freedom.

Experts often say, ‘all bonded labour is trafficking, but not all trafficking is bonded labour’. On this 50th anniversary, should we be considering merging these into a single ‘comprehensive anti-trafficking bill’ rather than relying on a 50-year-old law?

Dr Jacob: We are a country with many laws. Another law to the mix would not ensure the protection of the most vulnerable. We need to think through the assumption that the present set of laws and legal precedents against bonded labour is insufficient and reflect on what needs attention.

Through the BLSA and the various judgments of the Supreme Court since 1982 (Asiad case), Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India (1984), M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu and ors, 1997 we can see that the right against bonded labour is a right of every man, woman and child in this country to be free from being exploited for “forced labour”—a fundamental right protected in Articles 21, 23 and 24 of the Indian Constitution. Bonded labour is a crime in the Juvenile Justice Act when involving young children. Bonded labour is also a crime under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act when perpetrated against SC/STs.

Section 143 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS) now covers the crime of human trafficking across various forms of physical and sexual exploitation, including forced labour. The focus of BNS and the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act sections is unique and complementary. Penal provisions in BNS need to be coupled with strong enforcement action by the police and other justice delivery partners like Legal Aid Services, Human Rights Commissions. Additionally, training and sensitisation of district officials to identify cases of bonded labour, conduct surveys and awareness generation against bonded labour are all important to build deterrence against the crime of bonded labour.

The BLSA keeps the lens on protecting socio-economically marginalised and vulnerable communities from the crime of bonded labour by ensuring that the state apparatus works to ensure timely and effective identification, release and rehabilitation both in the short and long term.

Timely and effective rehabilitation for released bonded labour, as Justice Bhagwati stressed in the Neerja Chaudhary case (1984) is critical to prevent re-bondage. The Central Government’s Standard Operating Procedures on Bonded Labour (2017) and Scheme on Rehabilitation of Bonded Labour, 2021 need to be implemented with commitment, coordination and convergence across all relevant government departments in states and union territories.

This will call for coordination and convergence across departments for welfare benefits to survivors like Labour, Social Welfare, Women & Child, Panchayati Raj and Rural Development. The progress made in the implementation of the laws against bonded labour and government schemes needs to be reviewed and reported publicly.

If we want to address the crime of human trafficking and bonded labour, we need to dedicate budget and resources to the institutionalised training of all officials required to make the law effective. We also need victim centric justice system that can protect witnesses against intimidation from the accused.

A recent conviction in a child bonded labour case in Tamil Nadu shows how coordination between law enforcement agencies across states and victim-sensitive prosecution helped a young boy trafficked find freedom again.

Successful prosecution in this case has given him the opportunity to pursue his education without fear and distress. I am hopeful that we can learn from the good work happening across states as they tackle the crime of bonded labour, one case at a time.

Dr Jacob specialises in the subject of bonded labour, migration, human trafficking and sustainable development.

Why Dr Tina Kuriakose Jacob? She is a development sector practitioner, with over 15 years of experience working with both government and civil society organisations, bringing research and policy expertise on issues related to informal labour, migration, bonded labour, human trafficking, responsible business and sustainable development. Currently, she is a Consultant and Senior Research Fellow with The International Institute for Migration Development (IIMAD). Dr Jacob holds a PhD in law.

Her opinion pieces for The Indian Express can be read here and here.