[Cites 41, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Shri Saidam vs State Of Karnataka on 8 April, 2026
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION No.104709 OF 2022 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SHRI SAIDAM
S/O SHRI NAGARIYA DABTIKHALYA FLYA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
RESIDENT OF GRAM KANDRA VAN
POST LIMBI, TAHSIL PATI
JAIE, PATI, BARWANI
DISTRICT BARWANI
MADHYA PRADESH - 451 551.
2. SHRI JITARAM
S/O SHRI BHUYLA
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS
RESIDENT OF NO.24
BABTIKHIYA FLYA WARD NO.10
VILLAGE KANDRA, POST LIMBI
TAHSIL PATI LIMBI, DISTRICT BARWANI
MADHYA PRADESH - 451 551.
3. SHRI ISHWAR
S/O TERSHINGH MANKAR
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS
RESIDENT OF MAKAN, N/14
VILLAGE UBADAGARH POST, BOKRATA
TEH PATI, DISTRICT BARWANI
MADHYA PRADESH - 451 551.
2
4. SHRI NANURAM MANKAR
S/O SHRI TERSING MANKAR
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
RESIDENT OF MAKAN N/14
VILLAGE UBADAGARH
POST BOKRATA, TEH PATI
DISTRICT BARWANI
MADHYA PRADESH - 451 551.
5. SHRI DHEBA
S/O SHRI CHHATARSING BABAKHIYA FLYA
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KANDRA
POST LIMBI, TAHSIL PATI
DISTRICT BARWANI
MADHYA PRADESH - 451 551.
6. SMT. DEMA ABOK
D/O SHRI ABALYA BOKO
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
RESIDENT OF TEH/PATI
MAKAN N/058 MAIN ROAD
KEPAS WARD 16, SHIVAI, BOKRATA
DISTRICT BARWANI
MADHYA PRADESH - 451 551.
7. SMT. SAYA BAI
W/O SHRI SAIDAM
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
RESIDENT OF BABTIKHALYA FLYA
VILLAGE KANDRA
POST LIMBI, TEHSIL PATI, JAIE PATI
DISTRICT BARWANI
MADHYA PRADESH - 451 551.
8. SMT. RINGU
W/O SHRI ISVAR
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS
3
RESIDENT OF NO.14
VILLAGE UBADAGARH, FALYA
DISTRICT BARWANI
MADHYA PRADESH - 451 551.
9. SMT. SUNITA
W/O SHRI JITARAM
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
BAMDEVI FLAYA VILLAGE KANDRA
KOONDRA SERVED
DISTRICT BARWANI
MADHYA PRADESH - 451 551.
10 . SMT. LADKI
W/O SHRI NANURAM
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
RESIDENT OF WARD NO.2
VILLAGE UBADAGARH
DISTRICT BARWANI
MADHYA PRADESH - 451 551.
11 . SMT. RAMTI BAI
W/O SHRI DHEBA
BABTIKHLYA FLYA
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KANDRA
POST LIMBI, TAHSIL PATI
DISTRICT BARWANI
MADHYA PRADESH - 451 551.
12 . ILU D/O BHUYALA
AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS
REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER
SHRI BHUYALA S/O SHRI NAGARIYA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
RESIDENT OF 24 BABTIKHLYA FLYA
VILLAGE KANDRA, POST LIMBI, LIMBI
DISTRICT BARWANI
4
MADHYA PRADESH - 451 551.
13 . INDAS D/O KASHIRAM
AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS
REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER
SHRI KASHIRAM S/O SHRI NAGARIYA
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
RESIDENT OF BABTIKHLYA FLYA
VILLAGE KANDRA, POST LIMBI PATI
DISTRICT BARWANI
MADHYA PRADESH - 451 551.
14 . NIMU D/O KASHIRAM
AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS
REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER
SHRI KASHIRAM S/O SHRI NAGARIYA
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KANDRA
POST LIMBI, JAIE
DISTRICT BARWANI
MADHYA PRADESH - 451 551.
15 . ISAL D/O SAIDAM
AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS
REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER
SMT. SAYYA BAI
W/O SHRI SAIDAM
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
RESIDENT OF BABTIKHLYA FLYA
VILLAGE KANDRA VAN
POST LIMBI, TAHSIL PATIL JAIE PATI
DISTRICT BARWANI
MADHYA PRADESH - 451 551.
16 . RINU D/O SAIDAM
AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS
REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER
SMT. SAYYA BAI
W/O SHRI SAIDAM
5
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
RESIDENT OF BABTIKHALYA FLYA
VILLAGE KANDRA, POST LIMBI
TAHSIL PATI, JAIE PATI
DISTRICT BARWANI
MADHYA PRADESH - 451 551.
17 . SAWAN S/O BHOYLA
AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS
REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER
SHRI BYOLA S/O SHRI NAGARIYA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
RESIDENT OF BABTIKHALYA FLYA
VILLAGE KANDRA, POST LIMBI
DISTRICT BARWANI
MADHYA PRADESH - 451 551.
18 . HINGA D/O DANGU
AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS
REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER
SHRI DANGU S/O SHRI KHUSHAL
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
RESIDENT OF UKLA FLYA
VILLAGE UBADAGAD
POST BOKRATA PATI
DISTRICT BARWANI
MADHYA PRADESH - 451 551.
19 . BANU D/O GAREEB
AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS
REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER
SHRI GAREEB C/O SHRI LALASING
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
RESIDENT OF MAKAN NO.42 WARD NO.4
VILLAGE UBADAGARH, TAH PATI
DISTRICT BARWANI
MADHYA PRADESH - 451 551.
6
20 . RIYANI D/O HARIB @ HARI
AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS
REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER
SHRI HARIB @ HARI
S/O SHRI LALASING
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
R/O UKLA FLYA, VILLAGE UBADAGARH
POST BOKRATA, TEHSIL PATI
UBADAGARH, DISTRICT BARWANI
MADHYA PRADESH - 451 551.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI CLIFTON D.ROZARIO, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI D.M.MALLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
BELAGAVI DISTRICT, BELAGAVI.
3. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY THE TAHSILDAR
NIPANI TALUK, BELAGAVI DISTRICT.
4. SHREE HALASIDHANATH SAHAKARI
SAKHAR KARKHANA LIMITED
SHANKARANAND NAGAR
TALUKA CHIKODI, NIPANI
BELGAUM - 591 237.
5. SHIVAJI MARUTHI JADHAV
GHARSAWLI BEED
MAHARASTRA - 431 122.
7
6. ASHOK VAIJANATH SHINDE
MANYARWADI, PIMPALNER
WADWANI, BEED
MAHARASHTRA - 431 122.
7. BHAGIRAM (KALUBAI)
S/O HAMA BAGDARI
PANCHAYAT DHAWDA
DHAWALI, BARWANI
MADYA PARADESH - 451 665.
8. CHANDRAKANT GINYADER VANI
NIRMALWADI, P.O.DOOLA (BU)
NIRMALWADI BEED
MAHARASHTRA - 431 122.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI T.HANUMAREDDY, AGA FOR R1 TO R3;
SRI PRAVEEN TARIKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R4;
R5 NOTICE HELD SUFFICIENT,
R6 TO R8 ARE SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE AN APPROPRIATE
WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION QUASHING THE ORDER OF THE
DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, BELAGAVI, DATED 05.02.2022 BEARING
NO.DC/BONDED LABOUR/CR-04/2021-22 (PLACED AS ANNEXURE-
A).
THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED
FOR ORDERS, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
8
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CAV ORDER
The petitioners are before this Court calling in question an
order dated 05-02-2022 passed by the District Magistrate, Belagavi
rejecting the claim of the petitioners for their rehabilitation in terms
of the Central Sector Scheme for Rehabilitation of Bonded Labourer,
2016 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Scheme' for short).
2. Heard Sri Clifton D. Rozario, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioners, Sri T.Hanumareddy, learned Additional Government
Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and Sri Praveen Tarikar,
learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4.
3. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows: -
3.1. The petitioners claim to be adivasis from the State of
Madhya Pradesh. They were brought to Belagavi District and made
to work in conditions of bonded labour to harvest and load
sugarcane. The Petitioners 1 to 20 were made to work in Nippani
Taluk, out of whom petitioners 11 to 20 were made to work in
conditions of child labour. All the petitioners claim that they are
9
part of the same extended joint family who belong to various
villages in Barwani District of Madhya Pradesh. Petitioners 1 to 20
were approached by respondents Nos.6 and 7, labour contractors in
their village at Madhya Pradesh. Each one of them was offered
advance of ₹20,000/- to come and work for harvesting and loading
sugarcane for the 4th respondent. The advance paid by respondent
No.6 was in the presence of the 7th respondent. The petitioners
were assured that they would return in three months when their
debt cleared and with more earnings to their families. The
petitioners were not indicated rates of wages and details of
repayment. The petitioners come to the shores of the State to
work in the fields as indicated hereinabove.
3.2. It is the averment in the petition that they were made to
live in a tarpaulin shacks around the fields that they harvested. The
group would harvest sugarcane each day for half to one acre of land
from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. The petitioners, during the said period, were
not paid a single rupee by the contractors. What they received was
a small sum of ₹500 or ₹600 for the entire group of 20 petitioners.
It is the further averment in the petition that after working for
10
about 2 to 2 ½ months without a single holiday, the petitioners
contacted 7th respondent to enquire about their salary and the
amount due to them. The petitioners were taken by surprise when
they were told that out of ₹4/- lakhs advance given to all of them,
only half had been cleared and the workers were still under debt of
₹2/- lakhs.
3.3. The petitioners approached a social activist from Jagrit
Adivasi Dalit Sanghatan who submitted a representation to the
Deputy Labour Commissioner, Belagavi District and the
Superintendent of Police detailing the facts as they stood and
sought immediate rescue of the petitioners who were forced to
work as bonded labourers and also highlighted the violations of the
Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 ('Act' for short) and
several other enactments. Later a local NGO in Belagavi also
submitted representations to the District Magistrate seeking rescue
and rehabilitation of the petitioners and prosecution of the
perpetrators. A spot inspection was carried out on the said
representations on 21-01-2022. The Tahsildar, Nipani conducts an
inspection with the members of the Labour Department and
11
Panchayat authorities and opines in his report that there was no
bonded labour, no child labour and no violation of law.
Notwithstanding the said report of the Tahsildar, a representation
was also submitted detailing the factual situation and seeking
rehabilitation of the petitioners in accordance with law. The
representations go unheeded.
3.4. A complaint was also registered with the Deputy Labour
Commissioner for non-payment of minimum wages and due wages
to the petitioners. This also goes unheeded and the 4th
representation comes to be submitted to the District Magistrate,
Belagavi and to the District Legal Services Authority. It is then the
impugned order is passed rejecting to rescue the petitioners, on a
finding that there was no question of providing rehabilitation to the
petitioners in terms of the report of the Tahsildar which found no
violation of law. Aggrieved by the order of the 2nd
respondent/District Magistrate, Belagavi, the petitioners are before
this Court in the subject petition.
12
SUBMISSIONS:
PETITIONERS:
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would
vehemently contend that the impugned order is illegal, arbitrary
and it is in violation of the Act and would project violation of
Standard Operating Procedure ('SOP' for short) issued for rescue of
bonded labourers and even the violation of the Scheme i.e., the
Central Sector Scheme for Rehabilitation of Bonded Labourer.
STATE:
5. Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate
would vehemently refute the submissions in contending that the
petitioners were never treated as bonded labourers. The report of
the Tahsildar is enough circumstance to reject the petition.
6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions
made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the
material on record.
CONSIDERATION:
13
7. The afore-narrated facts are a matter of record. They
would require reiteration in slight detail. It would suffice if the
narration would commence from the representation submitted by
the Jagrit Adivasi Dalit Sangathan. The representations so
submitted are necessary to be noticed. They read as follows:
"Date: 19.01.2022
To,
1. The District Collector, District Belgavi, Karnataka
2. The Superintendent of Police, District Belgavi,
Karnataka
Sub: URGENT: Immediate rescue of Adivasi labourers
from Madhya Pradesh forced to work as Bonded Labour in
Belagavi, out of which 3 Adivasis have been kidnapped
and wrongfully confined in a sugar factory
Sir.
We, the activists of Jagrit Adivasi Dalit Sangathan, a peoples'
organization in Madhya Pradesh, have just been contacted by
the Adivasi workers of Tehsil Pati, District Barwani informing us
that they were taken to work as labourers on sugarcane farms
in Belagavi, Karnataka by a contractor named Shyam, around
three months ago (immediately after Dusshera) and have since
then they have been made to work continuously day and night -
they begin their work of cutting sugarcane at dawn until the
evening. After 5 PM they are made to load the sugarcane that
has been cut into trucks. They have not been paid their wages,
nor have they been informed of the wages they have earned so
far. They are being illegally detained on the farm and are being
prevented from leaving the farm. They are kept in two locations
in Belagavi-
1. Village Kasanal, Halsheetnaath Nipani, (around 20
adults and 6 children and
2. Village Halagatti (Halgeeta?), Ramdurg Police
Station area, (around 16 adults and 13 children)
14
Around three days ago, when the workers who were kept in
Halagatti asked an account of their earnings so far from the
contractor, Shyam, he asked 3 people to accompany him to the
factory, "Kulgeri Nirani" and talk to the owners there. Later, the
contractor returned alone, and informed the others that the
owner of the factory said that the workers still owe the factory
owner money that he paid to them in advance, and thus they
must work there as long as the owners would tell them to, and
was therefore holding 3 people hostage in the factory
itself.
The three workers now missing and believed to be
illegally confined in "Kulgeri Nirani" factory are -
1. Kailash s/o Kartap, resident of village Kandra,
Tehsil Pati, District Barwani
2. Jaadiya s/o Puniya, resident of Village Kandra,
Tehsil Pati, District Barwani
3. Debra s/o Nahaarsing, resident of Village
Ubadagad, Tehsil Pati, Distric Barwani.
Other workers can be contacted via these numbers -
1. In Village Kasanal - Saaidaam, (resident of Kandra
village): +91-7666933928
2. In Village Halgeeta Halagatti) - Kutaar, (resident of
Kandra): +91-8450834681; Durgaram (resident of
Ubadagad): +91-9098589284 and +91 7747911942.
Most workers were given Rs.20,000/ "advance" per head earlier
in the year. Since the minimum wages for agricultural work in
Karnataka is Rs 441 per day, this amount would have been
adjusted in lieu of wages more than two months ago and the
work they are performing since then is bonded labour.
Moreover, they are being made to work more than 16 hours a
day, every day. As per the provisions of the Bonded Labour
System (Abolition) Act, 1976, this is a clear case of Bonded
Labour. We request your urgent intervention in this matter as
per the provisions of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition)
Act, 1976, Inter-State Migrant Workmen (Regulation of
15
Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1979.
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Prohibition of Child Labour Act,
1986 and other relevant acts protecting and safeguarding
the rights of these workers which have been violated by the
contractors, farm owners and the management of the sugar
factory.
We request that-
1. The District Police and District Administration of
Belgavi immediately rescue and free these Adivasi
workers - men, women and children from the
sugarcane farms as well as the sugar factory, and
provide for their rehabilitation as per the applicable
legal provisions.
2. Immediate prosecution of the individuals and
parties involved in the crimes committed against
Adivasi workers.
On behalf of Jagrit Adivasi Dalit Sangathan,
Valsing Sastiya, Harsing Jamre, Madhuri,
Valsing Noju (brother of bonded worker, Saidam)
Enclosed: 1. tractor loading slip given to workers at Kasanal. 2.
tractor loading slips given to workers at Halgatti. These have
details of location.
.... .... .....
Date 21.01.22
To,
1. The District Collector, Belagavi District, Karnataka
2. The Superintendent of Police, Belagavi District, Karnataka
3. IG Police, Northern Range, Belagavi, Karnataka
Re: Letter dt. 19.01.22 re: freeing Adivasi bonded labourers
from Barwani district, Madhya Pradesh being illegally confined
Kulgeri Nirani/Shri Halasidhanath Sahakari Sakhar
Karkhana LTD; Nipani sugar factory and forced to work as
16
Bonded Labourers in the village of Kasanal and Halagatti, in
Belagavi district
Sub: Migrant Adivasi Workers from MP subject to Bonded
Labour, Trafficking, Atrocity under the Prevention of
Atrocities Act, 1989, and violations of labour laws, along
with offences under the IPC
Sir,
In our previous letter to you, dated 19.01.22, we informed you
of the case of Adivasi migrant workers forcibly employed in
conditions of Bonded Labour in Belagavi district. A total of 36
women and men along with 19 children are being kept in two
locations - Village Kasanal, (around 20 adults and 6
children), and Village Halagatti (Halgeeta), Ramdurg
Police Station area, (around 16 adults and 13 children)
Additionally, 3 of the migrant workers are believed to have been
kidnapped and illegally confined in Kulgeri Nirani/Shri
Halasidhanath Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana LTD; Nipani
sugar factory in Belagavi for almost one week now. These
workers are -
Kailash s/o Pratap, resident of village Kandra, Tehsil Pati,
District Barwani, Jaadiya s/o Puniya, resident of Village
Kandra, Tehsil Pati, District Barwani, Debra s/o
Nahaarsing, resident of Village Ubadagad, Tehsil Pati,
District Barwani
We would like to bring to your attention the following violations
against these workers -
Violations as per The Bonded Labour System (Abolition)
Act, 1976 (BLSAA)
As previously submitted, this case is primarily one of Adivasi
migrants being forcibly made to work under the Bonded Labour
System, which can be clearly established thus:
The workers from Barwani, were given an "advance" of
Rs. 20,000 each by a contractor, which served to act as a
"bonded debt" (as defined u/s 2 (a) and (d) of the Act). The
17
Act (u/s 2 (g)) clearly defines "bonded labour system" as a
system of "forced or partly forced labour, which a debtor,
is presumed to have entered to the effect that-
- 2 (g)(i) in consideration of an advance obtained by
him or by any of his lineal ascendants or
descendants (whether or not such advance is
evidenced by any document) and in consideration
of the interest, if any, on such advance, or
- 2 (g)(iv) for any economic consideration received
by him or by any of his lineal ascendants or
descendants, or
- 2 (g)(v)(1) he would render, by himself or through
any member of his family, or any person dependent
on him, labour or service to the creditor, or for the
benefit of the creditor, for a specified period or for
an unspecified period, either without wages or for
nominal wages, or
- 2 (g)(v)(2) forfeit the freedom of employment or
other means of livelihood for a specified period or
for an unspecified period, or
- 2 (g)(v)(3) forfeit the right to move freely
throughout the territory of India, or
- 2 (g)(v)(4) forfeit the right to appropriate or sell at
market value any of his property or product of his
labour or the labour of a member of his family or
any person dependent on him, and includes the
system of forced, or partly forced, labour under
which a surety for a debtor enters, or has, or is
presumed to have, entered, into an agreement with
the creditor to the effect that in the event of the
failure of the debtor to repay the debt, he would
render the bonded labour on behalf of the debtor;
In the case of the workers of Barwani, all of these conditions
clearly establish the fact that they are forcibly being made to
work under the bonded debt of an advance of Rs. 20,000 per
worker. They have not been paid any wages, they have not
been given any information about the terms of wages, any
account of how much wages are due to them, they have no
means of returning home and three members of their group
appear to be held hostage against their leaving.
18
Further, while the minimum wages for Agricultural and Related
Works in Karnataka as per is Rs. 441.28 per day for an
eight-hour day. These workers are being made to work more
than 16 hours a day, harvesting sugarcane from dawn to dusk
and then several hours until late night, they are loading the
cane onto transport trucks/tractors. Each worker is thus being
made to work 2 "person days" in a single day. Even if they
had been working for only eight hours a day, the advance sum
of Rs 20,000 per head would have been adjusted against wages
in 45 days, but they have now worked for three months without
wages.
Thus, as defined under S. 2 (g)(v)(1), the work being performed
is work under the bonded labour system. Under section 2 (i) it is
specified that any wage less than the minimum wage is a
"nominal wage" and thus bonded labour.
Under Section 15, the "burden of proof" to prove a debt is not
a bonded debt lies upon the creditor, ie the
contractor/employer.
Section 12 of the Act clearly underlines the duty of the District
Magistrate in such situations, tasking them with "to inquire
whether, after the commencement of this Act, any
bonded labour system or any other form of forced labour
is being enforced by, or on behalf of, any person resident
within the local limits of his jurisdiction and if, as a result
of such inquiry, any person is found to be enforcing the
bonded labour system or any other system of forced
labour, he shall forthwith take such action as may be
necessary to eradicate the enforcement of such forced
labour."
Further, the Act directs prosecution of persons involved in the
enforcement of bonded labour (u/s 16 of the Act),
advancement of bonded debt (u/s 17 of the Act) and for
extraction of bonded labour under the bonded labour
system (u/s 18 of the Act) abetment is also to be
prosecuted (section 20). As per section 22, every offence
under the Act is a cognizable offence.
Inter-State Migrant Workmen (Regulation of Employment
and Conditions of Service) Act, 1976
19
Section 2 (1)(a)(ii) of the Act holds that the State government
shall act as the "appropriate government" to monitor any
"establishment" defined under Section 2(1)(d)(ii) - "any place
where any industry, trade, business, manufacture or occupation
is carried on", where the "inter-state migrant workman" is "any
person who is recruited by or through a contractor in one State
under an agreement or other arrangement for employment in an
establishment in another State, whether with or without the
knowledge of the principal employer in relation to such
establishment;".
Section 6 of the Act clearly prohibits against employment of
Inter State Migrant Workmen without registration, however,
neither have the workers being registered as per the process
under law, nor has the contractor, as per section 12 of the Act,
fulfilled his duties towards these inter-state migrant workmen.
Contractors are required to be licensed Under section 12 (a),
contractors are required to inform the authorities both in the
state of origin as well as in the destination state about the
particulars of the workers. Under section 12 (b) they are
required to provide workers with a passbook with details of
work and payment
Further, "wages, welfare and other facilities to be provided to
inter-state migrant workmen" have been violated thus-
S 13 (b) "an inter-State migrant workman shall in no case be
paid less than the wages fixed under the Minimum Wages
Act, 1948" -the Adivasi migrant workers are currently being
paid much less than the notified minimum wages, as established
previously.
U/S 16 (a), contractor is to ensure "regular payment of
wages"
U/S 16 (c), contractor is to ensure "suitable conditions of
work to such workmen having regard to the fact that they are
required to work in a State different from their own State"
U/S 16 (d), to provide and maintain suitable residential
accommodation to such workmen during the period of their
employment;
20
U/S 17, the responsibility of the payment of wages falls
upon the contractor (u/s 17(1)) and the principal employer (u/s
17 (4)).
Violations as per The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
As per the SC/ST Act, section 3(1)(h) forcibly making a
person of the Scheduled Tribes do bonded labour constitutes as
an atrocity. Under section 4 of the Act, a public servant such as
yourself is legally bound to end such atrocity and prosecute the
persons responsible for the offence as per the legal provisions of
the Act.
Offences under the Indian Penal Code, 1860
Three persons are being forcibly held against their will under
illegal confinement, which constitutes as an offence under
Section 365, "Kidnapping or abducting with intent
secretly and wrongfully to confine person" and under
Section 368, "Wrongfully concealing or keeping in
confinement, kidnapped or abducted person".
Section 370 of the Indian Penal Code defines the recruitment,
transport, harbouring of person(s) for the purpose of
"exploitation" by force, coercion, fraud, inducement as
trafficking. In this case, close to 40 men, women and children
have been brought to work under bonded labour through
deception and inducement try way of bonded debt. paid via an
"advance". The workers are being made to work for longer than
eight hours a day and are being paid wages less than the
stipulated minimum wage by the state. Thus, the exploitation
of workers is being carried out through forced labour and
servitude.
Section 374 of the Indian Penal Code prohibits Unlawful
Compulsory Labour compelling any person to labour against
the will of that person, holding the offence punishable with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend
to one year, or with fine, or with both. It is also a cognizable
offence.
21
Guidelines of the NHRC-
The National Human Rights Commission has been mandated by
the Supreme Court in W.P. no (3922/1985) to get involved in
the implementation of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition)
Act, 1976, in fulfillment of which, the NHRC has published
clear guidelines for District Magistrates and Sub-
Divisional Magistrates for the identification, rescue and
rehabilitation of Bonded Labourers, as well as
prosecution of the Employers and Contractors responsible
for extraction and implementation of Bonded Labour,
which we have enclosed with this letter for your reference.
We therefore request you to take urgent action to ensure
1. Immediate release of the three persons who are
now missing and being illegally confined.
2. The release and safe transportation to their homes
of the victimized Adivasi families.
3. Criminal action under the aforementioned and any
other legal provisions, against all perpetrators
including those guilty of abetment and the
prinicipal employers.
4. Identification, release and rehabilitation all other
persons in the area who are being similarily
exploited, and steps to set up mechanisms for the
prevention of such exploitation of migrant workers.
Thanking you
Madhuri Valsing Sastia Harsing Jamre
Enclosed:
1. Letter dt. 19.01.22 re: freeing Adivasi bonded labourers
from Barwani district, Madhya Pradesh being illegally
confined Kulgeri Nirani/Shri Halasidhanath Sahakari
Sakhar Karkhana LTD; Nipani sugar factory and forced to
work as Bonded Labourers in the village of Kasanal and
Halagatti, in Belagavi district (2 pages)
2. Complete list of workers in i) Ramdurg and ii) Kasanal (2
pages, total)
22
3. NHRC Guidelines for District Magistrates, Sub-Divisional
Magistrates to follow at the time of identification and
rescue of bonded labourers (3 Images)
4. NHRC Guidelines for the prosecution Of
Employer/Contractor responsible for Bonded Labourers (5
images)"
Another non-governmental organization/Spandana also submits a
representation on 19-01-2022. On 21-01-2022 owing to the
representations so submitted, the Tahsildar, Nipani was directed to
inspect and draw up a report. The Tahsildar draws up a report
holding that there was nothing contrary to law happening in the
fields. The report reads as follows:
"PÀAzÁAiÀÄ E¯ÁSÉ (REVENUE DEPARMENT)
vÀºÀ²Ã¯ÁÝgÀ PÁAiÀiÁð®AiÀÄ ¤¥Áàt (TAHSILDAR OFFICE NIPPANI) - 591237
zÀÆgÀªÁt (Telephone) & ¥sÁåPïì (Fax): 08338 - 220395
Email: [email protected]
________________________________________________________________
ರ/ಎಂಎ / ಪ / ವ-01/2021-22 ¢£ÁAPÀ:24.01.2022
ಾನ ಉಪ ಾ ಾ ಾ ಗಳ
ೊ ೕ , ಇವ ೆ
ಾನ ೆ,
ಷಯ: ಮಧ ಪ$%ೇಶದ ಆ)*ಾ+ ಾ,-ಕರನು0 ತ2ಣ ರ4ಸುವ6ದು 7ಾಗೂ ತ89ಸ:ರ ರುದ; ಸೂಕ<
ಕ$ಮ ೈ ೊಳ >ವ ಕು ತು.
ಉ?ೆ@ೕಖ : ಾನ ?ಾ@ ಾ ಗಳ , Bೆಳ ಾ ಇವರ ತಮC ಇ-DೕE ಸಂ%ೇಶ/ಪತ$ ನಂ:
JA.J.f/f¥À¤/¹Dgï-245/2021-22 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 19.01.2022
****
Dೕಲ ಂಡ ಷಯ ೆ ಸಂಬಂ +ದಂIೆ, ಾನ ?ಾ@ ಾ ಗಳ , Bೆಳ ಾ 7ಾಗೂ ತಮC
ಉ?ೆ@ೕJತ ಪತ$ %ೇ-ಶನದ , Kಾ9L IಾಲೂMನ 7ೋಬNಯ ಕಸOಾಳ ಾ$ಮದP@
23
): 21.01.2022 7ಾಗೂ 24.01.2022 ರಂದು BೆN ೆQ 10.30 ಗಂRೆ ೆ ಸದ ಸ:ಳ ೆ ಈ ೆಳಕಂಡ
ಅ ಾ ಗಳ ಜಂVWಾX ೇV ೕ ದುY ಇರುತ<%ೆ.
1) Zಾ: [$ೕ \ೕಹ^ ಭ¸Éäà ತಹ[ೕ?ಾYರ 7ಾಗೂ Iಾಲೂಕು ಾಯ- *ಾ-ಹಕ ದಂZಾ ಾ ಗಳ
Kಾ9L
2) [$ೕ ಇPÁâE ಅOಾ` ಸ7ಾಯಕ ಾ,-ಕ ಆಯುಕ<ರು, Bೆಳ ಾ ಾಗ Bೆಳ ಾ
3) [$ೕ ಮ7ೇಶ ಕುಲ@N> ಾ,-ಕ ಅ ಾ ಉಪ ಾಗ -01 Bೆಳ ಾ
4) ಕು ಾ aೊ ೕb ಾಂIೆ, cೕಜOಾ %ೇ-ಶಕರು Bಾಲ ಾ,-ಕ cೕಜOಾ ಸಂdೆ: Bೆಳ ಾ
5) [$ೕಮb ಸುವಣ- ಗುರವ, DೕPefಾರಕರು +. .8.ಒ ಕhೇ Kಾ9L
6) [$ೕ ರ ೕಂದ$ ಅಜiಣjನವರ, ಆರ2ಕ ಉಪ ೕ2ಕರು, ಸದಲ ಾ
7) [$ೕ ಾaೇಶ ಅ¸ÉÆßÃಟಕರ ಾ,-ಕ ೕ2ಕರು, Kಾ9L
8) [$ೕ ದWಾನಂದ ಕಡಪVl ಪಂfಾಯತ ಅmವೃ); ಅ ಾ ಗಳ , ಾಣ ಾಪoರ
9) ಕಂ%ಾಯ ೕ2ಕರು, Kಾ9L
10) ಾ$ಮ ?ೆ ಾ ಾ ಗು, ಕಸOಾಳ
ಮುಂದುವ ೆಯುತ< ಉ?ೆ@ೕJತ ಪತ$ದ ಮಧ ಪ$%ೇಶ)ಂದ Kಾ9L IಾಲೂMನ Kಾ9L
7ೋಬNಯ ಕಸOಾಳ ಾ$ಮದP@ ಕpqನ IೋಟದP@ ಾ,-ಕ ಾX ೆಲಸ ಾಡಲು ಕ ೆ ತಂದು [$ೕ
rಾ s ಎಂಬ ಗುb< ೆ%ಾರ, ಸು ಾರು 3 bಂಗಳ tಂ%ೆ (ದಸ ಾ ಮುXದ ತ2ಣ) ಮತು< ಅಂ) ಂದ
ಅವರನು0 ಹಗ®Ä ಾb$ ರಂತರ*ಾX ೆಲಸ ಾ + ೊಂಡು ಅವ ೆ ಸಂಬಳ/ಕೂP ೕಡ%ೇ
ಅಕ$ಮ*ಾX ಜ,ೕ ನP@ ಬಂ + ಜ,ೕನು pಟುl 7ೋಗದಂIೆ ತZೆಯ?ಾಗುb<ದುY, ಸದ ಪ6ರುಷ,
ಮtuೆ ಮತು< ಮಕ ಳನು0 ಕpqನ Iೋಟ)ಂದ ಮುಕ< ೊN+ ತ2ಣ ಪ6ನವ-ಸb ಇತ ೇ dೌಲಭ ಗಳನು0
ೕಡುವಂIೆ ೋ ರುವ ಪ$ಯುಕ ಸದ ಸ:ಳ ೆ Dೕಲ ಂಡ ಅ ಾ ಗಳ ಜಂVWಾX ): 21.01.2022
ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 24.01.2022 ರಂದು BೆN ೆQ 10.30 ಗಂRೆ ೆ ೇV ೕ ದುY ಇರುತ<%ೆ. ಸದ ಮಧ ಪ$%ೇಶ
ಾಜ ದ ಬಡ*ಾwೆ ?ಾ@ ಕಡ*ಾ ಾ$ಮ)ಂದ Kಾ9L IಾಲೂMನ ಾ$ಮ ಕಸOಾಳದP@ [$ೕ
dಾx ಾಮ ( ಮ7ಾ ಾಜ) OೇತೃತeದP@ ಆಗ,+ದ ಪ6ರುಷ ಮತು< ಮtuೆಯರು dೇ 20 ಜನ, 06
ಮಕ ಳ ಸದ ಸ:ಳದP@ ಇದುY, ಸದ ಯವರ ಸಮ2ಮ fಾರwೆ ಾಡ?ಾX [$ೕ ಾಲು ಮು ಾದಮ,
ಗುb< ೆ%ಾರ, [$ೕ ಚಂದ$ ಾಂತ Xwಾ ಣ%ೇವ*ಾL ಗುb< ೆ%ಾರ ಇವರು ಸದ ಾ,-ಕ ೆ ಒಂದು ಗಂಡು
7ಾಗೂ ಒಂದು 7ೆಣುj dೇ ಇಬqರ aೋ ೆ ತ?ಾ ರೂ. 40,000/- ರೂ ಗಳಂIೆ (ನಲವತು< dಾ ರ
ರೂ.ಗಳ ) ದಸ ಾ ಸಮಯದP@ ಮುಂಗಡ*ಾX [$ೕ ಚಂದ$ ಾಂತ Xwಾ ಣ%ೇವ*ಾL ಎನು0ವವರು ಈ
ಾ,-ಕ ೆ ಹಣ ೕ ರುIಾ< ೆ ಎಂಬುದು fಾರwೆಯP@ ಸeತಃ ಾ,-ಕರು, ಅ ಾ ಗಳ ಸಮ2ಮ
bN+ರುIಾ< ೆ.
24
ಸದ ಾ,-ಕರು ತಮC Wಾವ6%ೇ *ೈಯುM<ಕ ಸಮdೆ WಾಗP ಮತು< *ೇತನ ೆ
ಸಂಬಂಧಪಟl ಸಮdೆ WಾಗP ಸಂಬಂ +ದ ಸ:Nೕಯ {ೕP| }ಾwೆ ೆ ದೂರುಗಳನು0 ಸP@+ರುವ6)ಲ@
ಎಂಬ ಷಯವನು0 7ಾಜ ದY ಆರ2ಕ ಉಪ ೕ2ಕರು, ಸದಲ ಾ ಇವರು ೌJಕ*ಾX 7ೇN ೆ ೕ
ಖ ತಪ + ೊಂ ರುIಾ< ೆ. ಅದರಂIೆ~ೕ Iಾಲೂಕು ಆಡNತ ಾ,-ಕ ಇ?ಾ•ೆ, ಮtuಾ ಮತು<
ಮಕ ಳ ಕ?ಾ ಣ ಇ?ಾ•ೆ ಮತು< ಸ:Nೕಯ ಪಂfಾxb ೆ Wಾವ6%ೇ ದೂರುಗಳ ಬಂ)ರುವ6ದು
ಕಂಡುಬಂ)ರುವ6)ಲ@ ಎಂಬುದು 7ೇN ೆ ಮು•ಾಂತರ ೌJಕ*ಾX ಖ ತಪ + ೊಂ ರುIಾ< ೆ. ಸದ
ಾ,-ಕರು ಮೂರು Oಾಲು )ನಗNಂದ ತಮC ಕRಾವ6 ೆಲಸ ಇಲ@%ೇ ಸದ ಾ$ಮದP@ ತಮC
ೕವOೋKಾಯ ೆ Bೇ ಾದ ಅ ೆ, )ನ+ dಾಮX$ಗಳ ಮತು< ಇತ ೆ ವಸು<ಗಳನು0 ಪZೆಯಲು
Wಾವ6%ೇ ವ M<ಯ ಅಡತZೆ ಇಲ@%ೆ/ Bೆದ ೆ ಇಲ@%ೇ mೕ-ತ*ಾX ತಮC ೕವನವನು0
dಾXಸುb<ರುವ6ದು ನಮC ಸಮ2ಮ fಾರwೆಯP@ bN+ರುIಾ< ೆ. ಸದ ಾ,-ಕರು ಕಬುq ಕRಾವ6
ಾ ದ ೈತ ಂದ ?ೋ€ ಆದ ಪ$b Rಾ$•ಕl‚ *ಾಹನ ೆ ರೂ.500/- ಗNಂದ 800/- ಗಳವ ೆ ೆ ಒಂದು
V$ƒ ೆ ಹಣ ಪZೆದು ೊಂ ರುವ ಬ ೆQ ಾ$ಮದ ೈತ [$ೕ rಾeಸ ಸaೇ- ಾ„ Oಾxಕ 7ಾಗೂ ಸ ೕನ
Bಾಳ [ಂ%ೆ ಕಸOಾಳ ಇವರ ಮುಂ%ೆ ಖ ತ ಪ +ರುIಾ< ೆ.
ಸದ fಾರwೆ *ೇuೆಯP@ ಕಸOಾಳ ಾ$ಮದ ಾ$ಮ ಪಂfಾಯತ ಸದಸ ಾದ [$ೕ ಸ ೕನ
Bಾಳ [ಂ%ೆ 7ಾಗೂ ಾ$ಮಸ: ಾದ [$ೕ Bಾ ೇಶ ಸು ೇಶ ನರಬಳ, [$ೕ 8ಂಟೂ ಾರುb ಾಂಬuೆ,
[$ೕಮb ಸು ೕIಾ ಾaಾ ಾಮ Oಾxಕ 7ಾಗೂ [$ೕಮb ಅ[e Bಾ ೇ... ನರ ೊuೆ ಇವರು ಸಮ2ಮ
ಸದ ಸ:ಳ ಪ [ೕಲOೆ 7ಾಗೂ dಾ: ಕ fೌ ಾ[ಯP@ 7ಾಜ ದYರು.
ಮಧ ಪ$%ೇಶ)ಂದ Kಾ9L IಾಲೂMನ Kಾ9L 7ೋಬNಯ ಕಸOಾಳ ಾ$ಮದP@ ಕpqನ
IೋಟದP@ ಾ,-ಕ ಾX ೆಲಸ ಾಡಲು ಕ ೆ ತಂದು [$ೕ ಚಂದ$ ಾಂತ Xwಾ ಣ%ೇವ*ಾL ಎಂಬ
ಗುb< ೆ%ಾರ, ಸ ಾರು 3 bಂಗಳ tಂ%ೆ (ದಸ ಾ ಮುXದ ತ2ಣ) ಮತು< ಅಂ) ಂದ ಅವರನು0 ಹಗಲು
ಾb$ ರಂತರ*ಾX ೆಲಸ ಾ + ೊಂಡು ಅವ ೆ ಸಂಬಳ/ಕೂP ೕಡ%ೆ ಅಕ$ಮ*ಾX ಜ,ೕ ನP@
ಬಂ + ಜ,ೕನು pಟುl 7ೋಗದಂIೆ ತZೆಯ?ಾಗುb<ರುವ6ದು ಎಂಬ ಉ?ೆ@ೕJತ ಪತ$ದP@ ಉ?ೆ@ೕJ+ದ
ದೂರು ಸತ ೆ ದೂರ*ಾXದುY ಇರುತ<%ೆ ಅಂIಾ ಸ:ಳ ತ •ೆಯP@ ಕಂಡುಬರುತ<%ೆ. ಸದ ಾ,-ಕರನು0
Wಾರು ಕೂಡ ಅಕ$ಮ*ಾX ಬಂ +ರುವ6)ಲ@ 7ಾಗೂ ಇವರು pಟುl7ೋಗದಂIೆ Wಾರು
ತZೆಯ?ಾXರುವ6)ಲ@. ಾರಣ, ಸದ ಾ,-ಕರು ೕತ ಾ,-ಕ ಾ~Y -1976ರ *ಾ 8< ೆ
ಒಳಪಡುವ6)ಲ@ ಎಂಬ ಷಯವನು0 7ಾಗೂ ಸದ ಾ~Yಯ *ಾ •ಾ ನ ೆ ಸಂಬಂ +ದ Wಾವ6%ೇ
ಷಯಗಳ ಪ ಗLಸ?ಾಗದು 7ಾಗು ಸದ ಎಲ@ ಾ,-ಕರು ಸeತಂತ$*ಾX ತಮC ೆಲಸವನು0
ವ-tಸುIಾ<, ತಮC )ನ ತ ದ ಅವಶ ಕIೆಗಳನು0 ಸeತಃ ಪo ೈ+ ೊಳ >b<%ಾY ೆ. ಸದ ಾ,-ಕ ೆ
Wಾವ6%ೇ ಬಂಧನ*ಾಗPೕ, Bೆದ ೆWಾಗPೕ Wಾ ಂದಲೂ ಇದYದೂY ಕಂಡುಬರುವ6)ಲ@.
25
ಅದರಂIೆ [$ೕ ಚಂದ$ ಾಂತ Xwಾ ಣ%ೇವ*ಾL ಗುb< ೆ%ಾರ ಇವರು 7ೇN ೆಯಂIೆ, Kಾ9L
IಾಲೂMನ ಾ$ಮ ಕಸOಾಳದP@ [$ೕ dಾಯ ಾಮ (ಮ7ಾ ಾಜ) OೇತೃತeದP@ ಆಗ,+ದ ಪ6ರಷ ಮತು<
ಮtuೆಯರು dೇ 20 ಜನ, 06 ಮಕ ಳ ಒಂದು ಕುಟುಂಬ ೆ ( 08 ಗಂಡು ಮತು< 7ೆಣುj 12) 20,000/-
ರೂ ರಂIೆ, ರೂ 40,0000/- ಮಂಗಡ*ಾX Kಾವbಸ?ಾX%ೆ. ತದನಂತರ Kಾ9L IಾಲೂMನ ಕಸOಾಳ
ಾ$ಮ ಆಗ,+ದ [$ೕ ಮ7ಾ ಾಜ Oೇತೃತeದ ಕುಟುಂಬದ ಾ,-ಕ ೆ ೋ), ಅM , ಅಡು ೆ ಎwೆj,
Iೊಗ Bೇuೆ, ಸಕ ೆ, ಚ7ಾಪ6 , ಅವಲM , ರ*ೆ, aೋಳ ಮತು< ಸaೆi ೊVl (Bಾಜ ) ಪo ೈ+ರುIಾ< ೆ.
ತ?ಾ ಒಂದು ಕುಟುಂಬ ೆ ಸದ ಕಬುq ಕRಾವ6 ಾಡP ೆ 7ೋ%ಾಗ ಪ$b ಟ^ ೆ 273/- ರೂ ಅದರಂIೆ
ಸದ ಕಬುq ಕRಾವ6 ಾಡುb<ರುವ ಾ,-ಕರು ೕತ ಾ,-ಕ ಾ~Yಯ , 7ಾಗೂ ಾ,-ಕ ೆ -
PÀ¤µÀ× ªÉÃvÀ£À PÁAiÉÄÝ-1948 C¢ü¸ÀÆZÀ£É ¸ÀASÉå: KAE40LMW-2007 Dated 30.12.2017
ಅನeಯ [$ೕ ಚಂದ$ ಾಂತ Xwಾ ಣ%ೇವ *ಾL, ಗುb< ೆ%ಾರರು, ಕ ಷ† *ೇತನ ೕಡಲು ಮುಚ‡N ೆ
(ಅˆಡ ‰) ಮೂಲಕ ಒ89ರುIಾ< ೆ. Iಾಲೂ ಾ ಆಡNತ ವbxಂದ 7ಾಗೂ ಾ$ಮ
ಪಂfಾಯbಯವ ಂದ ಮಧ ಪ$%ೇಶ ಾಜ ದ ಬಡ*ಾL ?ಾ@ ಕಡ*ಾ ಾ$ಮ)ಂದ Kಾ9L IಾಲೂMನ
ಕಸOಾಳ ಾ$ಮ ೆ ಬಂ)ರುವ [$ೕ dಾx ಾಮ (ಮ7ಾ ಾಜ) 7ಾಗೂ ಇತರರು ಪ6ರುಷ ಮತು<
ಮtuೆಯರು dೇ 20 ಜನ, 06 ಮಕ ಳ ಸದ ಸ:ಳದP@ ಇದುY, ಇವ ೆ ಧ dೌಲಭ ಗಳನು0
ಪo ೈಸ?ಾX%ೆ. 7ಾಗೂ ಸದ ಕಬುq ಕRಾವ6 ಾಡುb<ರುವ ಾ,-ಕರು ೕತ ಾ,-ಕ ಾ~Yಯ
ಬರುವ6ದು ಕಂಡುಬರುವ6)ಲ@ ಎಂಬ ಾtbಯನು0 ಾನ ರ ಅವ ಾಹOೆ ಾX ೌರವಪoವ-ಕ*ಾX
ಸP@ಸ?ಾX%ೆ.
ತಮC rಾe+
¸À»/-
ತಹ[ೕ?ಾYರ 7ಾಗೂ Iಾಲೂಕ ಾಯ- *ಾ-ಹಕ
ದಂZಾ ಾ ಗಳ Kಾ9L
ಈ ೆಳಕಂಡ ಅ ಾ ಗಳ ಸಮ2ಮ :
1) Zಾ: [$ೕ \ೕಹ^ ಭ¸Éäà ತಹ[ೕ?ಾYರ 7ಾಗೂ Iಾಲೂಕು ಾಯ- *ಾ-ಹಕ ದಂZಾ ಾ ಗಳ
Kಾ9L
2 ) [$ೕ JA.©. ಅOಾ` ಸ7ಾಯಕ ಾ,-ಕ ಆಯುಕ<ರು, Bೆಳ ಾ ಾಗ, Bೆಳ ಾ
3) [$ೕ ಮ7ೇಶ ಕುಲ@N> ಾ,-ಕ ಅ ಾ ಉಪ ಾಗ -01 Bೆಳ ಾ
4) ಕು ಾ aೊ ೕb ಾಂIೆ, cೕಜOಾ %ೇ-ಶಕರು Bಾಲ ಾ,-ಕ cೕಜOಾ ಸಂdೆ: Bೆಳ ಾ
5) [$ೕಮb ಸುವಣ- ಗುರವ, DೕPefಾರಕರು +. .8.ಒ ಕhೇ Kಾ9L
6) [$ೕ ರ ೕಂದ$ ಅಜiಣjನವರ, ಆರ2ಕ ಉಪ ೕ2ಕರು, ಸದಲ ಾ
7) [$ೕ ಾaೇಶ ಅ¸ÉÆßÃಟಕರ ಾ,-ಕ ೕ2ಕರು, Kಾ9L
26
8) [$ೕ ದWಾನಂದ ಕಡಪVl ಪಂfಾಯತ ಅmವೃ); ಅ ಾ ಗಳ , ಾಣ ಾಪoರ
9) ಕಂ%ಾಯ ೕ2ಕರು, Kಾ9L
10) ಾ$ಮ ?ೆ ಾ ಾ ಗು, ಕಸOಾಳ.
ಸt/-
ತಹ[ೕ?ಾYgÀ ºÁUÀÆ vÁ®ÆPÀ ಾಯ- *ಾ-ಹಕ
ದಂZಾ ಾ ಗಳ Kಾ9L."
The petitioners did not stop representing depicting their pathetic
state. A further representation comes to be filed on their behalf to
the District Legal Services Authority. It reads as follows:
"02.02.2022
To,
The Member Secretary
District Legal Services Authority
Belagavi District
Dear Sir,
Subject: Regarding incidents of bonded labour in
Belagavi District
The instant representation is to bring to your attention two very
serious incidents of bonded labour that occurred in Nippani
Taluk and Ramadurga Taluk, Belagavi district. As per our
discussion with you on 29.01.2022, please find attached our
representation on the issue.
As you know, recently, reports of a serious incident with the
members of the Adivasi community from Madhya Pradesh being
held as bonded labourers at Belagavi district of Karnataka
emerged. As it seemed at the outset that the statutory rights
under various beneficial legislations of these labourers has been
violated, a team consisting of Shashank SR (People's Union for
Civil Liberties - Karnataka), Avani Chokshi (All India Lawyers'
Association for Justice), Syed Junaid (All India Students'
27
Association) and Sachi (All India Students' Association) was
constituted to initiate a fact-finding into the issue. We are now
issuing this representation to you seeking necessary action.
We were informed that two separate incidents of bonded labor
had recently come to light in Belagavi district, in Ramadurga
taluk and Nipani taluk. The workers from Ramadurga had, after
a number of challenges, had made their way to Madhya
Pradesh. However, the group from Nipani Taluk remain stranded
in Belagavi till date.
From speaking with the workers who were still in Belagavi, the
narrative that emerged was one of horrific violations of law at
every level. The workers were lodged in the Urban Homeless
Shelter for Men at Belagavi. There are 11 adult workers with 6
young children at the shelter. Apart from this, there were 9
teenagers in the custody of the child welfare committee, who
were housed in girls' and boys' hostels separately.
We were informed that the workers belong to the villages of
Kandra and Ubadagad, Tehsil Pati, District Barwani, Madhya
Pradesh. They work as rural agriculturalists and belong to the
Scheduled Tribe adivasi community. The entire series of
incidents began immediately after Diwali festival, when they
were approached in their village by labour contractors Shri Kalu
and Shri Ashok Sindhya. They were offered an advance of Rs.
20,000 to each person who came to work, and promised that
they could return in three months, with their debt cleared and
with considerably more earnings for their family. They were not
told the rates of wages, or the details of repayment. Moreover,
they were never Informed of any interest accruing to the
advance given to them.
Twenty people belonging to the same extended family had
accepted this offer (of whom 11 are adults and 9 are
adolescents). The family also brought their six young children
along. The workers were talem from Madhya Pradesh three days
after Deepavali festival to Maharashtra in a pick-up taken, From
Maharashtra they were brought to Kasanal village near Nipani,
in Belagavi District by Mr. Ashok Sindhya who drove the tractor
they came in.
28
In Belagavi, they were made to live in tarpaulin shacks around
the fields that they harvested. Each day, the group was able to
harvest sugarcane from half to one acre of land which took from
7:00 AM to 6:00 PM. Thereafter, they loaded the same onto
tractors and were free to rest only after 9:30-10:00 PM. During
this period they were never paid a single rupee by the
contractor but received a small sum of Rs. 500-600 for the
entire group of 20 people from the farm owners each day. On
two occasions, they received some grains. Ashok Shinde's
relative, Chandrakant Vani used to make them work each day,
on behalf of Halasidnath Sugar Factory. It was he who told the
workers where to go each day. In fact, Mr. Kalu had returned
back to Madhya Pradesh. The workers repeatedly asked
Chandrakant Vali for accounts of how much was due to them
after adjusting the advance amount, but he refused to give any
accounts and only told them that a large sum was still due and
they had to continue working.
The workers informed us that after working for 2.5 months,
without even one day of holiday, they contacted Mr. Kalu to
enquire about their salary and the amounts due to them. To
their utter shock, they were informed that out of a total of Rs. 4
lakhs advance to the entire group, only half had been cleared
and the workers were still under the debt of Rs. 2 lakhs. The
workers were further informed that they would leave only after
clearing this debt.
When the workers reached out to a social activist from Jagrit
Adivasi Dalit Sanghatan in Madhya Pradesh, she apprised the
Tahsildar there, who got in touch with local authorities, following
which spot inspection was conducted. However the officers
stated that since the workers were not physically restrained,
and possessed mobile phones, they could not be considered
bonded labourers.
The workers told us that the Tehsildar initially promised that
they would be given transportation to their home. For this, he
took the sign of Saidam, the leader of the group. However, soon
after, the Tahsildar told Shri Saidam that a case had been
lodged against him for forcing 3 of the underage girls in the
group into forced labour. Due to this, the entire group was
traumatised and put into even more fear.
29
The workers are currently still in Belagavi and require
transportation back to their village in Madhya Pradesh. 9
children are in the custody of the CWC and will have to be
released to their parents after completion of formalities. Of
these nine children, there are children under 14 years old,
whose employment was a violation of the Child Labour
(Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986
In respect of the spot visit into the Ramadurga incident, Smt.
Susheela, the Director of Spandana NGO stated that she had
joined the Tahsildar, district Labour Officer, Taluk Labour
Inspector, District Child Labour Project Director, Child
Development Project Officer and a police official in the spot visit.
However, despite the clear testimony of the workers, all officials
stated that there had been no violation of law. Finally,
authorities arranged for transportation for the workers. In
another massive blunder, the workers were put onto a train that
terminated at Solapur, and were left stranded without money
there. Finally after the efforts of various groups, they managed
to reach Madhya Pradesh.
To the shock of the team, it was found that the Tahsildar
without detailed enquiry, and on the basis of the spot enquiry,
has prepared a report declaring that there was no bonded
labour, no child labour and no violation of law in respect of the
workers. This was on the basis of statements of farmers that
some amounts had been paid, and statements of officials of
various departments that no complaints had been received from
the workers. The report also found that since the labourers were
neither forcibly detained nor were their movement restricted,
the case would not fall under the Bonded Labour
System(Abolition) Act, 1976. It was also held that the provisions
of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 would
not be attracted. Importantly, annexed to the Report, was a
Statement of dues calculated in a wholly illegal manner,
contrary to the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and various other
laws. Copies of the Tahsildar reports are annexed for your
perusal.
Moreover, an affidavit filed by Mr. Chandrakant Vali is on file
regarding compliance of Minimum Wages Act, 1948 is on file in
the labour department but the team was unable to obtain a copy
of the same. This authority may kindly call for this affidavit.
30
Sir, it is pertinent to note that the system described above is a
textbook example of bonded labour. Bonded labour is prohibited
as a form of forced labour under Article 23 of the Constitution of
India. It also amounts to the violation of a fundamental right to
live with dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution. More
specifically, the system of bonded labour has been statutorily
abolished by the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976.
In terms of the said Act, the burden of implementation of the
mandate of the law is upon the District Magistrate under Section
10. Importantly, under Section 12 of the Act, it is the duty of
every District Magistrate to enquire whether any bonded labour
is being enforced within their jurisdiction and take necessary
action to eradicate this enforcement.
Significantly, Section 13 of the Act mandates the constitution of
a Vigilance Committee in each district consisting of the District
Magistrate who shall be the Chairman. The Vigilance Committee
must also include 3 persons belonging to the SC/ST
communities nominated by the District Magistrate, 2 social
workers resident in the district nominated by the District the
District Magistrate, etc. It is the obligatory function of the
Vigilance Committee to provide for the economic and social
rehabilitation of freed bonded labourers as also to conduct a
survey as to whether there is any offence of bonded labour in
the district.
It may also be remembered that the Central Sector Scheme for
Rehabilitation of Bonded Labour 2016 mandated payment of
rehabilitation package of Rs. 1 lakh per adult male bonded
labourer and Rs. 2 lakh per woman or child bonded labourers, in
addition to
1. Allotment of house site and agricultural land
2. Land Development
3. Provision of low cost dwelling units
4. Animal husbandry, dairy, poultry, piggery etc.
5. Wage employment, enforcement of minimum wages etc
6. Collection and processing of minor forest products
7. Supply of essential commodities under targeted PDS, and
8. Education for children.
31
The said Scheme of 2016 also provides that a Bonded Labour
Rehabilitation fund shall be created at the district level by each
State with a permanent corpus of at least Rs. 10 Lakhs at the
disposal of the District magistrate which should be renewable.
The fund will be used for extending immediate help to the
released bonded labourers.
In view of official reports that bonded labour is not attracted
here, it would be important to remember Section 15 of the
Bonded Labour Act, that reverses the burden of proof onto the
contractor to show that any debt is not bonded debt.
Importantly, even the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of
Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs Union of India said as follows -
"It would be cruel to insist that a bonded labourer in
order to derive the benefits of this social welfare
legislation should have to go through a formal process of
trial with the normal procedure for recording of evidence.
That would be a totally futile process because it is obvious
that a bonded labourer can never stand up to the rigidity
and formalism of legal processes due to his poverty,
illiteracy and social and economic backwardness and if
such a procedure were required to be followed, the State
government might as well obliterate this Act from the
Statute book. It is now statistically established that most
of bonded labourers are members of Scheduled Casted
and Scheduled Tribes or Other Backward Classes and
ordinary course of human affairs would show, indeed
judicial notice can be taken of it, that there would be no
occasion for a labourer to be placed in a situation where
he is required to supply forced labour for no wage or for
nominal wage, unless he has received some advance or
other economic consideration from the employer and
under the pretext of not having returned such advance or
other economic consideration, he is required to render
service to the employer or he is deprived of his freedom
of employment or of the right to move freely wherever he
wants. Therefore, whenever it is shown that a labourer is
made to provide forced labour, the court would raise a
presumption that he is required to do so in consideration
of an advance or other economic consideration received
by him and he is therefore a bonded labourer. This
presumption may be rebutted by the employer and also
32
by the stat government if it chooses but unless and until
satisfactory material is produced for rebutting this
presumption, the court must proceed on the basis that
the labourer is a bonded labour entitled to the benefit of
the provisions of the Act. The State government
cannot be permitted to repudiate its obligation to
identify, release and rehabilitate the bonded
labourers on the plea that though the concerned
labourer may be providing forced labour, the State
government does not owe any obligation to them
unless and until they show in an appropriate legal
proceeding conducted according to the rules of
adversary system of justice, that they are bonded
labourers."
The violation of rights of this group of persons from Madhya
Pradesh is immense. The constitutional violations relate to
Artides 23 and 21 of the Constitution of India, violations of the
below laws, schemes and advisories is also seen
• Bonded Labour System (Prohibition) Act, 1976
• Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986
• The Minimum Wages Act, 1948
• The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act, 1989, which prohibits the compulsion or
enticemnent of a member of a Scheduled Caste or a
Scheduled Tribe to do 'begar' or other similar forms of
forced or bonded labour Inter-State Migrant Workmen
(Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service)
Act, 1979
• Central Sector Scheme for Rehabilitation of Bonded
Labourers - 2016
• NHRC Advisories to Identify, Release and Rehabilitate
Bonded Labourers
In view of the gravity and nature of the crimes against these
workers, we request you to take cognisance of the issue, extend
necessary support, and issue necessary directions in the interest
of justice and equity.
Sd/-
(Avani Chokshi)
(Shashank SR) All India Lawyers' Association for Justice
33
People's Union of Civil Liberties
Ph: 9663888718 Ph: 9449068530
(Syed Junaid) (Sachi)
All India Students' Association All India Students' Association."
On the basis of all the representations, the impugned order is
passed by the District Magistarte, Belagavi entirely relying upon the
report of the Tahsildar. The order reads as follows:
"GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA.
(Revenue Department)
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, BELAGAVI.
Phone-0831-2407275 e-mail:[email protected]
__________________________________________________
No.DC/Bonded Labour/CR-04/2021-22 Dated: O5-02-2022
To,
1) Jagrit Adivasi Dalit Sangathan and Others, Madhya Pradesh.
2) Shri. Sudhir Katiyar Member, Prayas Centre for Labor
Research And Action, Member, Core Group on Bonded
Labourers NHRC, 285 Shankar Colony, Fatehpura, Udaipur -
313001, Rajasthan.
3) Shri. Shashank SR, People's Union for Civil Liberties.
4) Shri. Syed Junaid and Sachi, All India Students Association.
5) Shri. Avani Chokshi, Advocate.
6) Smt. V. Sushila, Director, Spandana Institute, Belagavi.
Sir,
Sub: Immediate rescue of Adivasi labourers from
Madhya Pradesh forced to work as Bonded
Labour in Belagavi, out of which 3 Adivasis have
been kidnapped and wrongfully confined in a
sugar factory.
Ref: 1. Your's letters and e-mail Dated: 19.01.2022,
20.01.2022, 02.02.2022.
34
2. Asst. Commissioner and Sub Division,
Magistrate, Bailhongal Sub Division, Bailhongal's
letter No.MAG/BLA/CR-245/2021-22 Dated:
27.01.2022.
3. Asst. Commissioner and Sub Division,
Magistrate, and Sub Division, Magistrate, Chikkodi
Sub Division, Chikkodi's letter No.MAG/BL/CR-
01/2021-22 Dated: 02.02.2022.
4. Deputy Labour Commissioner, Belagavi Region,
Belagavi 's letter No.DLCB/Bakaka/2021-22 Dated:
03.02.2022.
****
With reference to above mentioned subject and
references Jagrit Aadivasi Dalit Sangathan, a people
organization in Madhya Pradesh sent e-mail complaint alleging
that a Contractor by name Shyam had taken Adivasi workers of
Tehsil Pati, District Barwani to work as a labourers on sugarcane
farms in Belagavi around three months ago and have since then
they have been made to work continuosly day and night. They
began their work of cutting sugarcane till the evening and after
05.00 p.m. they are made to load the sugarcane that has been
cut into trucks. Further alleged that they have not been paid
their wages and they are being illegally detained on the farm
and are being prevented from leaving the farm. They are kept in
two locations (1) Village Kasanal, (Halsheetnaath), Nippani
(around 20 adults and 6 Children) and (2) Village Halagatti in
Ramdurg police station (around 16 adults and 13 Children). The
workers when asked about their earnings they were not
informed and 3 people accompany contractor to the factory
'Kulgeri Nirani' and when asked the owners of factory, they
informed that the workers still owe the factory owners money
that he had paid them in advance and thus they must work
there as long as owners would tell them to, thus holding 3
people hostage in the factory itself. Further though the amount
of advance given to workers had been adjusted to their wage,
they are detained illegally and they performing work as bonded
labourer. Therefore concerned Jagrit Aadivasi Dalit Sangathan
requested to intervene in the matter as per provisions of
Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 and Inter State
Migrant Workmen (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of
Service) Act, 1979 to protect and safeguard the rights of these
35
workers which have been violated by the Contractors from
owners and management of the sugar factory.
On receipt of such e-mail complaint concerned Sub
Divisional Magistrate were asked to look into the complaint and
submit detail enquiry report vide letter of this office dated
19.01.2022. Who have inturn asked the concerned Tahasildars
to visit the place where the workers alleged to have been
detained and the farm owners and Contractors treating them as
Bonded Labourers.
It is submitted that the Tahasildar, Ramdurg along
with 1.District Labour Officer, Belagavi, 2.Project
Director, NCLP, Belagavi, 3.Co-ordinator, Child Helpline
1098, 4.District Child Protection Officer, Belagavi
5.C.D.P.O. Ramdurg, 6.CPI, Ramdurg, 7.Labour Inspector,
Ramdurg, 8.PDO, Halagatti, 9.Revenue Inspector,
Mudakavi, 10. Village Accountant, Halagatti and 11.Smt.
Sushila, Spandana NGO, Belagavi (representative on
behalf of said labourers - complainant) visited the place
shown in the complaint on 20.01.2022 at 10.30 a.m. in all 18
adults and 14 Children were present on they being enquired
they told that, the Contractor Shyam paid advance of
Rs.20,000/- per adult to work in the farm for cutting sugarcane.
Further, they told that for the last 10 days they are
working in the farm and they have no any problem nor filed any
complaint to local Ramdurg police. During enquiry by the
Tahasildar, the workers informed that they are not detained by
anyone and they don't have any obstruction from anyone to
purchase daily commodities for their livelihood and also they are
free to move without any fear. Thus the workers who were
brought by Contractor Shyam are doing sugarcane cutting in the
farm and they are not coming under Bonded Labour Abolition
Act as alleged as a Bonded Labourers.
Thus, as per the enquiry report of Tahasildar, Sub
Divisional Magistrate, Bailhongal has submitted a detailed report
to the undersigned District Magistrate, Belagavi on 27.01.2022
stating that the allegations made in the complaint are not
correct.
36
Likewise, on 21.01.2022 & 24.02.2022 at 10.30
a.m. Tahasildar, Nippani also visited the place where the
workers are allegedelly detained along with 1.Asst.
Labour Commissioner, Belagavi Divn, Belagavi, 2. Labour
Officer Sub Divn-1, Belagavi, 3.Project Director, NCLP,
Belagavi, 4.C.D.P.O. Nippani, 5.CPI, Sadalaga, 6.Labour
Inspector, Sadalaga, 7.PDO, Manakapur, 8. Revenue
Inspector, Nippani, 9. Village Accountant, Kasanal and
10.Smt. Sushila, Spandana NGO, Belagavi (representative
on behalf of said labourers - complainant) and enquired
those workers on being enquired they told that, the (1)
Kalu Mukadam (2) Chandrakant Ginyandev Vani
Contractors have paid advance of Rs.20,000/- per adult
to work in the farm for cutting sugarcane.
Further, they told that they are doing work without
anybody's obstruction and they are being paid Rs.273/-
per ton as cutting wage. Further, they have not filed any
complaint either against Contractors or farm owner to the
local police nor Panchayat Officer. The workers informed
that they are not detained by anyone and they don't have
any obstruction from anyone to purchase daily
commodities for their livelihood and also they are free to
move without any fear. Thus, the workers who were
brought by (1) Kalu Mukadam (2) Chandrakant
Ginyandev Vani Contractors are doing sugarcane cutting
in the farm and they are not coming under Bonded Labour
Abolition Act as alleged as a Bonded Labourers.
Thus, as per the enquiry report of Tahasildar, Nippani,
Sub Divisional Magistrate. Chikkodi has submitted a detailed
report to the undersigned District Magistrate, Belagavi on
02.02.2022 stating that the allegations made in the above
referred complaint are not correct.
Further, both Sub Divisional Magistrates in their report
clearly mentioned that the above labourers are not Bonded
Labourers and their children are also not engaged to work in the
farm (Reports are enclosed herewith).
Further, as per the report of Deputy Labour
Commissioner, Belagavi Region the Minimum Wage of
sugarcane cutting would be Rs.451/- per 8 hours In case if they
37
are engaged more than 8 hours they shall be paid over time as
per Minimum Wages Act, 1948. It is further submitted in the
report that Adivasi workers of Madhya Pradesh throught therir
representative, submitted the application for payment of
minimum wages as per Minimum Wages Act, 1948. In this
regard on behalf of Deputy Labour Commissioner, Belagavi
Region a joint meeting was conved on 03.02.2022 between
labour representative and contractor by labour officer, Sub
Division-I. Belagavi and conciliation failed. Therefore, the
request of Adivasi workers of Madhya Pradesh to be considered
as their claim. Accordingly enquiry is being conducted under
Section 20 of Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (Report is enclosed
herewith).
Therefore, question of rescue and free these Adivasi
workers men, women and children from the sugarcane farms as
well as sugar factory and providing them rehabilitation as per
legal provisions of law does not arise.
Yours Faithfully.
Sd/-
District Magistrate,
Belagavi District, Belagavi
Copy to:
1) Deputy Labour Commissioner. Belagavi Region, Belagavi
2) Asst. Commissioner and Sub Division, Magistrate, Bailhongal
Sub Division, Bailhongal.
3) Asst. Commissioner and Sub Division, Magistrate, and Sub
Division, Magistrate, Chikkodi Sub Division, Chikkodi.
Sd/-
Addl. District Magistrate,
Belagavi District, Belagavi."
(Emphasis added)
The report of the Tahsildar has thus got merged into the impugned
order. The Tahsildar visited the place shown in the complaint,
38
where the workers were detained, at 10:30 a.m. on 21-01-2022
and 24-02-2022. Upon being enquired they appear to have
revealed that the contractors - one Kalu Mukadam Vani and the
respondent No.8, had paid an advance of ₹20,000/- per adult to the
workers to work in the farm for harvesting sugarcane. However, it
is also stated that the workers revealed that they were being paid ₹
273/- per ton as cutting wages and were not detained by anyone.
8. The order of the District Magistrate runs blatantly in
violation of plethora of representations submitted by these
petitioners.
8.1. Bonded labour system is a scourge that needs to be
eradicated not today, the Apex Court right from PEOPLE'S UNION
FOR DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS v. UNION OF INDIA1 has been
flagging this problem. The Apex Court notes that Article 23 of the
Constitution prohibits all forms of forced labour, whether with or
without remuneration. Futher, it is the constitutional obligation of
1
(1982) 3 SCC 235
39
the State to interdict any violation of Article 23 of the Constitution.
The Apex Court, in the said judgment, has held as follows:
"........ ........ ........
13. The question then is as to what is the true scope
and meaning of the expression "traffic in human beings
and begar and other similar forms of forced labour" in
Article 23? What are the forms of "forced labour"
prohibited by that article and what kind of labour
provided by a person can be regarded as "forced labour"
so as to fall within this prohibition? When the
Constitution-makers enacted Article 23 they had before
them Article 4 of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights but they deliberately departed from its language
and employed words which would make the reach and
content of Article 23 much wider than that of Article 4 of
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They banned
"traffic in human beings" which is an expression of much
larger amplitude than "slave trade" and they also
interdicted "begar and other similar forms of forced
labour". The question is what is the scope and ambit of
the expression "begar" and other similar forms of forced
labour'? Is this expression wide enough to include every
conceivable form of forced labour and what is the true
scope and meaning of the words "forced labour"? The
word "begar" in this article is not a word of common use
in English language. It is a word of Indian origin which
like many other words has found its way in the English
vocabulary. It is very difficult to formulate a precise
definition of the word "begar", but there can be no doubt
that it is a form of forced labour under which a person is
compelled to work without receiving any remuneration.
Molesworth describes 'begar' as "labour or service
exacted by a Government or person in power without
giving remuneration for it". Wilson's Glossary of Judicial
and Revenue Terms gives the following meaning of the
word "begar":"a forced labourer, one pressed to carry
burthens for individuals or the public. Under the old
system, when pressed for public service, no pay was
given. The begari, though still liable to be pressed for
40
public objects, now receives pay. Forced labour for private
service is, prohibited." "Begar" may therefore be loosely
described as labour or service which a person is forced to
give without receiving any remuneration for it. That was
the meaning of the word "begar" accepted by a Division
Bench of the Bombay High Court in S. Vasudevan v. S.D.
Mital [AIR 1962 Bom 53 : 63 Bom LR 774 : (1961-62) 21
FJR 441] . "Begar" is thus clearly a form of forced labour.
Now it is not merely "begar" which is unconstitutionally
(sic) prohibited by Article 23 but also all other similar
forms of forced labour. This Article strikes at forced
labour in whatever form it may manifest itself, because it
is violative of human dignity and is contrary to basic
human values. The practice of forced labour is condemned
in almost every international instrument dealing with
human rights. It is interesting to find that as far back as
1930 long before the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights came into being, International Labour Organisation
adopted Convention No. 29 laying down that every
member of the International Labour Organisation which
ratifies this convention shall "suppress the use of forced
or compulsory labour in all its forms" and this prohibition
was elaborated in Convention No. 105 adopted by the
International Labour Organisation in 1957. The words
"forced or compulsory labour" in Convention No. 29 had
of course a limited meaning but that was so on account of
the restricted definition of these words given in Article 2
of the Convention. Article 4 of the European Convention of
Human Rights and Article 8 of the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights also prohibit forced or
compulsory labour. Article 23 is in the same strain and it
enacts a prohibition against forced labour in whatever
form it may be found. The learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the respondents laid some emphasis on the word
"similar" and contended that it is not every form of forced
labour which is prohibited by Article 23 but only such
form of forced labour as is similar to "begar" and since
"begar" means labour or service which a person is forced
to give without receiving any remuneration for it, the
interdict of Article 23 is limited only to those forms of
forced labour where labour or service is exacted from a
person without paying any remuneration at all and if
some remuneration is paid, though it be inadequate, it
41
would not fall within the words "other similar forms of
forced labour". This contention seeks to unduly restrict
the amplitude of the prohibition against forced labour
enacted in Article 23 and is in our opinion not well
founded. It does not accord with the principle enunciated by
this Court in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India [(1978) 1 SCC 248
: AIR 1978 SC 597 : (1978) 2 SCR 621] that when interpreting
the provisions of the Constitution conferring fundamental rights,
the attempt of the court should be to expand the reach and
ambit of the fundamental rights rather than to attenuate their
meaning and content. It is difficult to imagine that the
Constitution-makers should have intended to strike only at
certain forms of forced labour leaving it open to the socially or
economically powerful sections of the community to exploit the
poor and weaker sections by resorting to other forms of forced
labour. Could there be any logic or reason in enacting that
if a person is forced to give labour or service to another
without receiving any remuneration at all, it should be
regarded as a pernicious practice sufficient to attract the
condemnation of Article 23, but if some remuneration is
paid for it, then it should be outside the inhibition of that
article? If this were the true interpretation, Article 23
would be reduced to a mere rope of sand, for it would
then be the easiest thing in an exploitative society for a
person belonging to a socially or economically dominant
class to exact labour or service from a person belonging
to the deprived and vulnerable section of the community
by paying a negligible amount of remuneration and thus
escape the rigour of Article 23. We do not think it would
be right to place on the language of Article 23 an
interpretation which would emasculate its beneficent
provisions and defeat the very purpose of enacting them.
We are clearly of the view that Article 23 is intended to
abolish every form of forced labour. The words "other
similar forms of forced labour" are used in Article 23 not
with a view to importing the particular characteristic of
"begar" that labour or service should be exacted without
payment of any remuneration but with a view to bringing
within the scope and ambit of that article all other forms
of forced labour and since "begar" is one form of forced
labour, the Constitution-makers used the words "other
similar forms of forced labour". If the requirement that
labour or work should be exacted without any
42
remuneration were imported in other forms of forced
labour, they would straightaway come within the meaning
of the word "begar" and in that event there would be no
need to have the additional words "other similar forms of
forced labour". These words would be rendered futile and
meaningless and it is a well-recognised rule of interpretation that
the court should avoid a construction which has the effect of
rendering any words used by the legislature superfluous or
redundant. The object of adding these words was clearly to
expand the reach and content of Article 23 by including, in
addition to "begar", other forms of forced labour within the
prohibition of that article. Every form of forced labour,
"begar" or otherwise, is within the inhibition of Article 23
and it makes no difference whether the person who is
forced to give his labour or service to another is
remunerated or not. Even if remuneration is paid, labour
supplied by a person would be hit by this article if it is
forced labour, that is, labour supplied not willingly but as
a result of force or compulsion. Take for example a case
where a person has entered into a contract of service with
another for a period of three years and he wishes to
discontinue serving such other person before the
expiration of the period of three years. If a law were to
provide that in such a case the contract shall be
specifically enforced and he shall be compelled to serve
for the full period of three years, it would clearly amount
to forced labour and such a law would be void as
offending Article 23. That is why specific performance of a
contract of service cannot be enforced against an
employee and the employee cannot be forced by
compulsion of law to continue to serve the employer. Of
course, if there is a breach of the contract of service, the
employee would be liable to pay damages to the employer
but he cannot be forced to continue to serve the employer
without breaching the injunction of Article 23. This was
precisely the view taken by the Supreme Court of United States
in Baily v. Alabama [219 US 219 : 55 L Ed 191] while dealing
with a similar provision in the Thirteenth Amendment. There, a
legislation enacted by the Alabama State providing that when a
person with intent to injure or defraud his employer enters into a
contract in writing for the purpose of any service and obtains
money or other property from the employer and without
refunding the money or the property refuses or fails to perform
43
such service, he will be punished with a fine. The constitutional
validity of this legislation was challenged on the ground that it
violated the Thirteenth Amendment which inter alia
provides:"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude ... shall exist
within the United States or any place subject to their
jurisdiction." This challenge was upheld by a majority of the
Court and Mr Justice Hughes delivering the majority opinion
said:
"We cannot escape the conclusion that although the statute
in terms is to punish fraud, still its natural and inevitable effect
is to expose to conviction for crime those who simply fail or
refuse to perform contracts for personal service in liquidation
of a debt, and judging its purpose by its effect that it seeks in
this way to provide the means of compulsion through which
performance of such service may be secured. The question is
whether such a statute is constitutional."
The learned Judge proceeded to explain the scope and ambit of
the expression "involuntary servitude" in the following words:
"The plain intention was to abolish slavery of whatever
name and form and all its badges and incidents, to render
impossible any state of bondage; to make labour free by
prohibiting that control by which the personal service of one
man is disposed of or coerced for another's benefit, which is
the essence of involuntary servitude."
Then, dealing with the contention that the employee in that
case had voluntarily contracted to perform the service which was
sought to be compelled and there was therefore no violation of
the provisions of the Thirteenth Amendment, the learned Judge
observed:
"The fact that the debtor contracted to perform the labour
which is sought to be compelled does not withdraw the
attempted enforcement from the condemnation of the statute.
The full intent of the constitutional provision could be defeated
with obvious facility if through the guise of contracts under
which advances had been made, debtors could be held to
compulsory service. It is the compulsion of the service that the
statute inhibits, for when that occurs, the condition of
servitude is created which would be not less involuntary
because of the original agreement to work out the
indebtedness. The contract exposes the debtor to liability for
the loss due to the breach, but not to enforce labour."
44
and proceeded to elaborate this thesis by pointing out:
"Peonage is sometimes classified as voluntary or
involuntary, but this implies simply a difference in the mode of
origin, but none in the character of the servitude. The one
exists where the debtor voluntarily contracts to enter the
service of his creditor. The other is forced upon the debtor by
some provision of law. But peonage however created, is
compulsory service, involuntary servitude. The peon can
release himself therefrom, it is true, by the payment of the
debt, but otherwise the service is enforced. A clear distinction
exists between peonage and the voluntary performance of
labour or rendering of services in payment of a debt. In the
latter case the debtor though contracting to pay his
indebtedness by labour or service, and subject like any other
contractor to an action for damages for breach of that
contract, can elect at any time to break it, and no law or force
compels performance or a continuance of the service."
It is therefore clear that even if a person has contracted
with another to perform service and there is consideration
for such service in the shape of liquidation of debt or even
remuneration he cannot be forced, by compulsion of law or
otherwise, to continue to perform such service, as that
would be forced labour within the inhibition of Article 23.
This article strikes at every form of forced labour even if it
has its origin in a contract voluntarily entered into by the
person obligated to provide labour or service
(vide Pollock v. Williams [322 US 4 : 88 L Ed 1095] ). The reason
is that it offends against human dignity to compel a person to
provide labour or service to another if he does not wish to do so,
even though it be in breach of the contract entered into by him.
There should be no serfdom or involuntary servitude in a free
democratic India which respects the dignity of the individual and
the worth of the human person. Moreover, in a country like
India where there is so much poverty and unemployment
and there is no equality of bargaining power, a contract of
service may appear on its face voluntary but it may, in
reality, be involuntary, because while entering into the
contract, the employee, by reason of his economically
helpless condition, may have been faced with Hobson's
choice, either to starve or to submit to the exploitative
45
terms dictated by the powerful employer. It would be a
travesty of justice to hold the employee in such a case to
the terms of the contract and to compel him to serve the
employer even though he may not wish to do so. That
would aggravate the inequality and injustice from which
the employee even otherwise suffers on account of his
economically disadvantaged position and lend the
authority of law to the exploitation of the poor helpless
employee by the economically powerful employer. Article
23 therefore says that no one shall be forced to provide
labour or service against his will, even though it be under a
contract of service.
14. Now the next question that arises for consideration is
whether there is any breach of Article 23 when a person provides
labour or service to the State or to any other person and is paid
less than the minimum wage for it. It is obvious that ordinarily no
one would willingly supply labour or service to another for less
than the minimum wage, when he knows that under the law he is
entitled to get minimum wage for the labour or service provided
by him. It may therefore be legitimately presumed that when a
person provides labour or service to another against receipt of
remuneration which is less than the minimum wage, he is acting
under the force of some compulsion which drives him to work
though he is paid less than what he is entitled under law to
receive. What Article 23 prohibits is "forced labour" that is
labour or service which a person is forced to provide and
"force" which would make such labour or service "forced
labour" may arise in several ways. It may be physical force
which may compel a person to provide labour or service to
another or it may be force exerted through a legal
provision such as a provision for imprisonment or fine in
case the employee fails to provide labour or service or it
may even be compulsion arising from hunger and poverty,
want and destitution. Any factor which deprives a person
of a choice of alternatives and compels him to adopt one
particular course of action may properly be regarded as
"force" and if labour or service is compelled as a result of
such "force", it would be "forced labour". Where a person
is suffering from hunger or starvation, when he has no
resources at all to fight disease or to feed his wife and
children or even to hide their nakedness, where utter
46
grinding poverty has broken his back and reduced him to a
state of helplessness and despair and where no other
employment is available to alleviate the rigour of his
poverty, he would have no choice but to accept any work
that comes his way, even if the remuneration offered to
him is less than the minimum wage. He would be in no
position to bargain with the employer; he would have to
accept what is offered to him. And in doing so he would be
acting not as a free agent with a choice between
alternatives but under the compulsion of economic
circumstances and the labour or service provided by him
would be clearly "forced labour". There is no reason why
the word "forced" should be read in a narrow and
restricted manner so as to be confined only to physical or
legal "force" particularly when the national charter, its
fundamental document has promised to build a new
socialist republic where there will be socio-economic
justice for all and everyone shall have the right to work, to
education and to adequate means of livelihood. The
Constitution-makers have given us one of the most
remarkable documents in history for ushering in a new
socio-economic order and the Constitution which they have
forged for us has a social purpose and an economic mission
and therefore every word or phrase in the Constitution
must be interpreted in a manner which would advance the
socio-economic objective of the Constitution. It is not
unoften that in a capitalist society economic circumstances
exert much greater pressure on an individual in driving
him to a particular course of action than physical
compulsion or force of legislative provision. The word
"force" must therefore be construed to include not only
physical or legal force but also force arising from the
compulsion of economic circumstances which leaves no
choice of alternatives to a person in want and compels him
to provide labour or service even though the remuneration
received for it is less than the minimum wage. Of course, if
a person provides labour or service to another against
receipt of the minimum wage, it would not be possible to
say that the labour or service provided by him is "forced
labour" because he gets what he is entitled under law to
receive. No inference can reasonably be drawn in such a
case that he is forced to provide labour or service for the
simple reason that he would be providing labour or service
47
against receipt of what is lawfully payable to him just like
any other person who is not under the force of any
compulsion. We are therefore of the view that where a
person provides labour or service to another for
remuneration which is less than the minimum wage, the
labour or service provided by him clearly falls within the
scope and ambit of the words "forced labour" under Article
23. Such a person would be entitled to come to the court
for enforcement of his fundamental right under Article 23
by asking the court to direct payment of the minimum
wage to him so that the labour or service provided by him
ceases to be "forced labour" and the breach of Article 23 is
remedied. It is therefore clear that when the petitioners
alleged that minimum wage was not paid to the workmen
employed by the contractors, the complaint was really in
effect and substance a complaint against violation of the
fundamental right of the workmen under Article 23.
15. Before leaving this subject, we may point out with all the
emphasis at our command that whenever any fundamental
right which is enforceable against private individuals such
as, for example, a fundamental right enacted in Article 17
or 23 or 24 is being violated, it is the constitutional
obligation of the State to take the necessary steps for the
purpose of interdicting such violation and ensuring
observance of the fundamental right by the private
individual who is transgressing the same. Of course, the
person whose fundamental right is violated can always approach
the court for the purpose of enforcement of his fundamental right,
but that cannot absolve the State from its constitutional
obligation to see that there is no violation of the fundamental
right of such person, particularly when he belongs to the weaker
section of humanity and is unable to wage a legal battle against a
strong and powerful opponent who is exploiting him. The Union of
India, the Delhi Administration and the Delhi Development
Authority must therefore be held to be under an obligation to
ensure observance of these various labour laws by the contractors
and if the provisions of any of these labour laws are violated by
the contractors, the petitioners vindicating the cause of the
workmen are entitled to enforce this obligation against the Union
of India, the Delhi Administration and the Delhi Development
Authority by filing the present writ petition. The preliminary
48
objections urged on behalf of the respondents must accordingly
be rejected."
8.2. Later, the Apex Court in BANDHUA MUKTI MORCHA v.
UNION OF INDIA2 has held as follows:
"........ ........ ........
21. Lastly, we must consider the provisions of the Bonded
Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976. We have already pointed
out that many of the States are not prepared to admit the
existence of bonded labour in their territories and the State of
Haryana is no exception. But in order to determine whether there
is any bonded labour in the stone quarries and stone crushers in
the Faridabad area of the State of Haryana, it is necessary to
examine some of the relevant provisions of the Bonded
Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976. This Act was enacted
with a view to giving effect to Article 23 of the Constitution
which prohibits traffic in human beings and beggar and
other similar forms of forced labour. We have had occasion to
consider the true scope and dimension of this article of the
Constitution in People's Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of
India [People's Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India,
(1982) 3 SCC 235 : 1982 SCC (L&S) 275 : AIR 1982 SC 1473 :
(1983) 1 SCR 456] commonly known as the Asiad
Workers' case and it is not necessary for us to say anything more
about it in the present judgment. Suffice it to state that this
Act is intended to strike against the system of bonded
labour which has been a shameful scar on the Indian social
scene for decades and which has continued to disfigure the
life of the nation even after independence. The Act was
brought into force throughout the length and breadth of
the country with effect from October 25, 1975, which
means that the Act has been in force now for almost 8
years and if properly implemented, it should have by this
time brought about complete identification, freeing and
rehabilitation of bonded labour. But as official, semi-official
and non-official reports show, we have yet to go a long
2
(1984) 3 SCC 161
49
way in wiping out this outrage against humanity. Clause
(d) of Section 2 defines "bonded debt" to mean an advance
obtained or presumed to have been obtained, by a bonded
labourer, under or in pursuance of, the bonded labour
system. The expression "bonded labourer" is defined in
clause (f) to mean "a labourer who incurs, or has, or is
presumed to have incurred a bonded debt". Clause (g)
defines "bonded labour system" to mean:
"the system of forced, or partly forced, labour under which a
debtor enters, or has, or is presumed to have, entered, into an
agreement with the creditor to the effect that,--
(i) in consideration of an advance obtained by him or by any
of his lineal ascendants or descendants (whether or not such
advance is evidenced by any document) and in consideration of
the interest, if any, due on such advance, or
(ii) in pursuance of any customary or social obligation, or
***
(iv) for any economic consideration received by him or by any
of his lineal ascendants or descendants, or
***
he would--
(1) render, by himself or through any member of his family,
or any person dependent on him, labour or service to the
creditor, or for the benefit of the creditor, for a specified period
or for an unspecified period, either without wages or for nominal
wages, or
(2) forfeit the freedom of employment or other means of
livelihood for a specified period or for an unspecified period, or
(3) forfeit the right to move freely throughout the territory of
India, or
(4) forfeit the right to appropriate or sell at market value any
of his property or product of his labour or the labour of a
member of his family or any person dependent on him."
The expression "nominal wages" is defined in clause (i) of
Section 2 to mean, in relation to any labour, a wage which is less
than--
(a) the minimum wages fixed by the Government, in relation
to the same or similar labour, under any law for the time being in
force, and
(b) where no such minimum wage has been fixed in relation to
any form of labour, the wages that are normally paid, for the
50
same or similar labour, to the labourers working in the same
locality.
Section 4 is the material section which provides for abolition of
bonded labour system and it runs as follows:
"4. (1) On the commencement of this Act, the bonded labour
system shall stand abolished and every bonded labourer shall,
on such commencement, stand freed and discharged from any
obligation to render any bonded labour.
(2) After the commencement of this Act, no person shall--
(a) make any advance under, or in pursuance of, the bonded
labour system, or
(b) compel any person to render any bonded labour or other
form of forced labour."
Section 5 invalidates any custom or tradition or any contract
agreement or other instrument by virtue of which any person or
any member of the family or dependent of such person is required
to do any work or render any service as a bonded labourer.
Section 6 provides inter alia that on the commencement of the
Act, every obligation of a bonded labourer to repay any bonded
debt or such part of any bonded debt as remains unsatisfied
immediately before such commencement, shall be deemed to
have been extinguished. There are certain other consequential
provisions in Sections 7 to 9 but it is not necessary to refer to
them. Sections 10 to 12 impose a duty on every District
Magistrate and every officer to whom power may be
delegated by him, to enquire whether, after the
commencement of the Act, any bonded labour system or
any other form of forced labour is being enforced by or on
behalf of, any person resident within the local limits of his
jurisdiction and if, as a result of such enquiry, any person
is found to be enforcing the bonded labour system or any
other system of forced labour, he is required forthwith to
take the necessary action to eradicate the enforcement of
such forced labour. Section 13 provides for constitution of a
Vigilance Committee in each District and each sub-division of a
District and sets out what shall be the composition of each
Vigilance Committee. The functions of the Vigilance Committee
are set out in Section 14 and among other things, that section
provides that the Vigilance Committee shall be responsible inter
alia to advise the District Magistrate as to the efforts made and
51
action taken, to ensure that the provisions of the Act or any rule
made thereunder are properly implemented, to provide for the
economic and social rehabilitation of the freed bonded labourers
and to keep an eye on the number of offences of which
cognisance has been taken under the Act. Then comes Section
15 which lays down that whenever any debt is claimed by
any labourer or a Vigilance Committee to be a bonded debt,
the burden of proof that such debt is not a bonded debt
shall lie on the creditor. These are some of the material
provisions of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976
which need to be considered.
22. It is a matter of regret that though Section 13 provides for
constitution of a Vigilance Committee in each District and each
sub-division of a District, the Government of Haryana, for some
reason or the other, did not constitute any Vigilance Committee
until its attention was drawn to this requirement of the law by this
Court. It may be that according to the Government of Haryana
there were not at any time any bonded labourers within its
territories, but even so Vigilance Committees are required by
Section 13 to be constituted, because the function of the Vigilance
Committee is to identify bonded labourers, if there are any, and
to free and rehabilitate them and it would not be right for the
State Government not to constitute Vigilance Committees on the
assumption that there are no bonded labourers at all. But we are
glad to find that the Government of Haryana has now constituted
a Vigilance Committee in each District. It does not appear from
the record whether a Vigilance Committee has been constituted
also in each sub-division of a District but we have no doubt that
the Government of Haryana will without any delay and at any rate
within six weeks from today constitute a Vigilance Committee in
each sub-division and thus comply with the requirement of
Section 13 of the Act. We may point out that in constituting
Vigilance Committee in each District and sub-division, the
Haryana Government would do well to include representatives of
non-political social action groups operating at the grass root level,
for it is only through such social action groups and voluntary
agencies that the problem of identification of bonded labour can
be effectively solved.
23. It was contended by the learned Additional Solicitor-
General on behalf of the State of Haryana that in the stone
52
quarries and stone crushers, there might be forced labourers but
they were not bonded labourers within the meaning of that
expression as used in the Act, since a labourer would be a bonded
labourer only if he has or is presumed to have incurred a bonded
debt and there was nothing in the present case to show that the
workmen employed in the stone quarries and stone crushers had
incurred or could be presumed to have incurred any bonded debt.
It was not enough, contended the learned Additional Solicitor-
General, for the petitioner merely to show that the workmen were
providing forced labour in that they were not allowed to leave the
premises of the establishment, but it was further necessary to
show that they were working under the bonded labour system.
The learned Additional Solicitor-General also submitted that in
any event, even if the workmen filed affidavits to the effect that
they had taken advances from thekedar or jamadar and/or mine
lessees and/or stone crusher owners and they were not allowed to
leave the premises of the establishment until the advances were
paid of, that would not be enough evidence for the Court to hold
that they were bonded labourers, because the mine lessees and
stone crusher owners had no opportunity to cross-examine the
workmen making such affidavits. This contention was seriously
pressed by the learned Additional Solicitor-General on behalf of
the State of Haryana, but as we shall presently show, there is no
substance in this contention. We may point out that in the
course of the arguments we did suggest to the learned
Additional Solicitor-General that even if the workmen were
not bonded labourers in the strict sense of the term but
were merely forced to provide labour, should the State
Government not accept liability for freeing and
rehabilitating them, particularly in view of the Directive
Principles of State Policy. The State of Haryana was
however not prepared to come forward with any proposal
in this behalf.
24. Now it is clear that bonded labour is a form of forced
labour and Section 12 of the Bonded Labour System
(Abolition) Act, 1976 recognises this self-evident
proposition by laying a duty on every District Magistrate
and every officer specified by him to enquire whether any
bonded labour system or any other form of forced labour is
being enforced by or on behalf of any person and, if so, to
take such action as may be necessary to eradicate the
53
enforcement of such forced labour. The thrust of the Act is
against the continuance of any form of forced labour. It is
of course true that, strictly speaking, a bonded labourer
means a labourer who incurs or has or is presumed to have
incurred a bonded debt and a bonded debt means an
advance obtained or presumed to have been obtained by a
bonded labourer under or in pursuance of the bonded
labour system and it would therefore appear that before a
labourer can be regarded as a bonded labourer, he must
not only be forced to provide labour to the employer but he
must have also received an advance or other economic
consideration from the employer unless he is made to
provide forced labour in pursuance of any custom or social
obligation or by reason of his birth in any particular caste
or community. It was on the basis of this definitional
requirement that the learned Additional Solicitor-General
on behalf of the State of Haryana put forward the
argument that even if the workmen employed in the stone
quarries and stone crushers were being, compelled to
provide forced labour, they were not bonded labourers,
since it was not shown by them or by the petitioner that
they were doing so in consideration of an advance or other
economic consideration received from the mine lessees
and owners of stone crushers. Now if this contention of the
learned Additional Solicitor-General were well founded, it
would become almost impossible to enforce the provisions
of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976
because in every case where bonded labourers are sought
to be identified for the purpose of release and
rehabilitation under the provisions of the Act, the State
Authorities as also the employer would be entitled to insist
that the bonded labourers must first prove that they are
providing forced labour in consideration of an advance or
other economic consideration received by them and then
only they would be eligible for the benefits provided under
the Act and this would make it extremely difficult, if not
impossible, for the labourers to establish that they are
bonded labourers because they would have no evidence at
all to prove that any advance or economic consideration
was provided to them by the employer and since
employment of bonded labourers is a penal offence under
the Act the employer would immediately, without any
hesitation, disown having given any advance or economic
54
consideration to the bonded labourers. It is indeed difficult
to understand how the State Government which is
constitutionally mandated to bring about change in the life
conditions of the poor and the downtrodden and to ensure
social justice to them, could possibly take up the stand
that the labourers must prove that they are made to
provide forced labour in consideration of an advance or
other economic consideration received from the employer
and are therefore bonded labourers. It is indeed a matter
of regret that the State Government should have insisted
on a formal, rigid and legalistic approach in the matter of a
statute which is one of the most important measures for
ensuring human dignity to these unfortunate specimens of
humanity who are exiles of civilization and who are leading
a life of abject misery and destitution. It would be cruel to
insist that a bonded labourer in order to derive the benefits
of this social welfare legislation, should have to go through
a formal process of trial with the normal procedure for
recording of evidence. That would be a totally futile
process because it is obvious that a bonded labourer can
never stand up to the rigidity and formalism of the legal
process due to his poverty, illiteracy and social and
economic backwardness and if such a procedure were
required to be followed, the State Government might as
well obliterate this Act from the statute book. It is now
statistically established that most of bonded labourers are
members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes or
other backward classes and ordinary course of human
affairs would show, indeed judicial notice can be taken of
it, that there would be no occasion for a labourer to be
placed in a situation where he is required to supply forced
labour for no wage or for nominal wage, unless he has
received some advance or other economic consideration
from the employer and under the pretext of not having
returned such advance or other economic consideration, he
is required to render service to the employer or is deprived
of his freedom of employment or of the right to move
freely wherever he wants. Therefore, whenever it is shown
that a labourer is made to provide forced labour, the Court
would raise a presumption that he is required to do so in
consideration of an advance or other economic
consideration received by him and he is therefore a bonded
labourer. This presumption may be rebutted by the
55
employer and also by the State Government if it so chooses
but unless and until satisfactory material is produced for
rebutting this presumption, the Court must proceed on the
basis that the labourer is a bonded labourer entitled to the
benefit of provisions of the Act. The State Government
cannot be permitted to repudiate its obligation to identify,
release and rehabilitate the bonded labourers on the plea
that though the concerned labourers may be providing
forced labour, the State Government does not owe any
obligation to them unless and until they show in an
appropriate legal proceeding conducted according to the
Rules of adversary system of justice, that they are bonded
labourers.
25. The first question that arises in regard to the
implementation of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition)
Act, 1976 is that of identification of bonded labour. One
major handicap which impedes the identification of bonded
labour is the reluctance of the administration to admit the
existence of bonded labour, even where it is prevalent. It
is therefore necessary to impress upon the administration
that it does not help to ostrich-like bury its head in the
sand and ignore the prevalence of bonded labour, for it is
not the existence of bonded labour that is a slur on the
administration but its failure to eradicate it and moreover
not taking the necessary steps for the purpose of wiping
out this blot on the fair name of the State is a breach of its
constitutional obligation. We would therefore direct the
Government of Haryana and also suggest to the other State
Governments, to take steps to sensitise the officers concerned
with the implementation of the Act to this acute human problem
and its socio-economic parameters. Moreover it may be noted
that the District Magistrates have a central role to play under the
provisions of the Act and the State Governments would therefore
do well to instruct the District Magistrates to take up the work of
identification of bonded labour as one of their top priority tasks.
There are certain areas of concentration of bonded labour which
can be easily identified on the basis of various studies and reports
made by governmental authorities, social action groups and social
scientists from time to time. These areas of concentration of
bonded labour are mostly to be found in stone quarries, brick
kilns and amongst agricultural landless labourers and such areas
56
must be mapped out by each State Government and task forces
should be assigned for identification and release of bonded
labour. Labour camps should be Held periodically in these areas
with a view to educating the labourers and for this purpose, the
assistance of the National Labour Institute may be taken, because
the National Labour Institute has the requisite expertise and
experience of holding such camps and it should be associated
with the organisation and conduct of such camps and in each such
camp, individuals with organisational capability or potential
should be identified and given training in the work of identification
and release of bonded labour. More importantly non-political
social action groups and voluntary agencies and particularly those
with a record of honest and competent service for Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes, agricultural labourers and other
unorganised workmen should be involved in the task of
identification and release of bonded labourers, for it is primarily
through such social action groups and voluntary agencies alone
that it will be possible to eradicate the bonded labour system,
because social action groups and voluntary agencies comprising
men and women dedicated to the cause of emancipation of
bonded labour will be able to penetrate through the secrecy under
which very often bonded labourers are required to work and
discover the existence of bonded labour and help to identify and
release bonded labourers. We would therefore direct the Vigilance
Committees as also the District Magistrates to take the assistance
of non-political social action groups and voluntary agencies for the
purpose of ensuring implementation of the provisions of the
Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976.
26. The other question arising out of the implementation
of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 is that
of rehabilitation of the released bonded labourers and that
is also a question of the greatest importance, because if
the bonded labourers who are identified and freed, are not
rehabilitated, their condition would be much worse than
what it was before during the period of their serfdom and
they would become more exposed to exploitation and slide
back once again into serfdom even in the absence of any
coercion. The bonded labourer who is released would
prefer slavery to hunger, a world of "bondage and
(illusory) security" as against a world of freedom and
starvation. The State Governments must therefore
57
concentrate on rehabilitation of bonded labour and evolve
effective programmes for this purpose. Indeed they are
under an obligation to do so under the provisions of the
Bonded Labour System (Abolition Act), 1976. It may be
pointed out that the concept of rehabilitation has the following
four main features as admirably set out in the letter dated
September 2, 1982 addressed by the Secretary, Ministry of
Labour, Government of India to the various State Governments:
"(i) Psychological rehabilitation must go side by side with
physical and economic rehabilitation;
(ii) The physical and economic rehabilitation has 15 major
components namely allotment of house-sites and agricultural
land, land development, provision of low cost dwelling units,
agriculture, provision of credit, horticulture, animal husbandry,
training for acquiring new skills and developing existing skills,
promoting traditional arts and crafts, provision of wage
employment and enforcement of minimum wages, collection and
processing of minor forest produce, health, medical care and
sanitation, supply of essential commodities, education of
children of bonded labourers and protection of civil rights;
(iii) There is scope for bringing about an integration among
the various central and centrally sponsored schemes and the on-
going schemes of the State Governments for a more qualitative
rehabilitation. The essence of such integration is to avoid
duplication i.e. pooling resources from different sources for the
same purpose. It should be ensured that while funds are not
drawn from different sources for the same purpose funds drawn
from different sectors for different components of the
rehabilitation scheme are integrated skilfully; and
(iv) While drawing up any scheme/programme of
rehabilitation of freed bonded labour, the latter must necessarily
be given the choice between the various alternatives for their
rehabilitation and such programme should be finally selected for
execution as would meet the total requirements of the families
of freed bonded labourers to enable them to cross the poverty
line on the one hand and to prevent them from sliding back to
debt bondage on the other."
27. We would therefore direct the Government of
Haryana to draw up a scheme or programme for "a better
and more meaningful rehabilitation of the freed bonded
labourers" in the light of the above guidelines set out by
the Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of
58
Labour in his letter dated September 2, 1982. The other
State Governments are not parties before us and hence we
cannot give any direction to them, but we hope and trust
that they will also take suitable steps for the purpose of
securing identification, release and rehabilitation of
bonded labourers on the lines indicated by us in this
judgment.
........ ........ ........
69. My brothers have dealt with the preliminary objections
raised by the respondents to the maintainability of this
proceeding. On the considerations to which I have adverted
earlier I have no hesitation in agreeing with them that the
preliminary objections must be rejected. I have no doubt in my
mind that persons in this country obliged to serve as
bonded labour are entitled to invoke clause (1) of Article
23 of the Constitution. The provisions embodied in that
clause form a vital constituent of the Fundamental Rights
set forth in Part III of the Constitution, and their violation
attracts properly the scope of Article 32 of the
Constitution. I also find difficulty in upholding the objection by
the respondents in regard to the admissibility and relevance of
the material consisting of the report of the two advocates and of
Dr Patwardhan appointed as commissioners. It is true that the
reports of the said commissioners have not been tested by cross-
examination, but then the record does not show whether any
attempt was made by the respondents to call them for cross-
examination. The further question whether the appointment of
the commissioners falls within the terms of Order 46 of the
Supreme Court Rules, 1966 is of technical significance only,
because there was inherent power in the Court, in the particular
circumstances of this case, to take that action. I have already set
forth earlier my views in respect of the nature and forms of
procedure open to the Court in public interest litigation and I need
not elaborate them here. I may add, however; that the Court
would do well to issue notice to the respondents, before
appointing any commissioner, in those cases where there is little
apprehension of the disappearance of evidence.
........ ........ ........
74. The substance of the grievance of the
petitioners in this petition is that the workmen referred
to in the communication addressed to this Court are
bonded labourers. In 1976, the Parliament enacted the
59
Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 and by
virtue of the provisions of the said Act, the bonded labour
system has been declared to be illegal in this country.
Any person who is wrongfully and illegally employed as a
labourer in violation of the provisions of the Act, is in
essence deprived of his liberty. A bonded labourer truly
becomes a slave and the freedom of a bonded labourer in
the matter of his employment and movement is more or
less completely taken away and forced labour is thrust
upon him. When any bonded labourer approached this
Court, the real grievance that he makes is that he should
be freed from this bondage and he prays for being set at
liberty and liberty is no doubt a fundamental right
guaranteed to every person under the Constitution. There
cannot be any manner of doubt that any person who is
wrongfully and illegally detained and is deprived of his
liberty can approach this Court under Article 32 of the
Constitution for his freedom from wrongful and illegal
detention, and for being set at liberty. In my opinion,
whenever any person is wrongfully and illegally deprived
of his liberty, it is open to anybody who is interested in
the person to move this Court under Article 32 of the
Constitution for his release. It may not very often be
possible for the person who is deprived of his liberty to
approach this Court, as by virtue of such illegal and
wrongful detention, he may not be free and in a position
to move this Court. The petitioner in the instant case
claims to be an association interested in the welfare of
society and particularly of the weaker section. The
petitioner further states that the petitioner seeks to
promote the welfare of the labourers and for promoting
the welfare of labour, the petitioner seeks to move this
Court for releasing the bonded labourers from their
bondage and for restoring to them their freedom and
other legitimate rights. The bonded labourers working in
the far-away places are generally poor and belong to the
very weak section of the people. They are also not very
literate and they may not be conscious of their own
rights. Further, as they are kept in bondage their freedom
is also restricted and they may not be in a position to
approach this Court. Though no fundamental right of the
petitioner may be said to be infringed, yet the petitioner
who complains of the violation of the fundamental right
60
of the workmen who have been wrongfully and illegally
denied their freedom and deprived of their constitutional
right must be Held to be entitled to approach this Court
on behalf of the bonded labourers for removing them
from illegal bondage and deprivation of liberty. The locus
standi of the petitioner to move this Court appears to be
conclusively established by the decision of this Court in the case
of S.P. Gupta v. Union of India [1981 Supp SCC 87 : AIR 1982
SC 149] . Forced labour is constitutionally forbidden by
Article 23 of the Constitution. As in the present case the
violation of the fundamental right of liberty of the
workmen who are said to be kept in wrongful and illegal
detention, employed in forced labour, is alleged, Article
32 of the Constitution, to my mind, is clearly attracted.
The first ground raised on behalf of the respondents cannot,
therefore, be sustained."
The Apex Court in the afore-quoted judgement categorically holds
that Section 2(g) of the Act which defines the term 'bonded labour
system' prohibits all forms of forced labour for which an advance is
paid. Further, Section 12 of the Act imposes a duty on the District
Magistrate to enquire into any form of bonded labour being
practised. Section 15 of the Act provides for a presumption in
favour of the bonded labourer and the burden of proving that the
debt was not a bonded debt lies on the creditor. The Apex Court
while considering the difficulties faced by the bonded labourers in
proving their case, states that bonded labourers cannot be
compelled to prove that they are not bonded labourers as it would
be impossible to prove the same. Further, the Apex Court also
61
observes that the major impediment in identification of bonded
labourers is the reluctance of the administration to admit the
existence of bonded labour despite it being evident.
8.3. The Apex Court, in its judgment in the case of NEERAJA
CHAUDHARY v. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH3, highlights the
importance of rehabilitation of the bonded labourers and test to be
applied to determine whether the workman is a bonded labourer or
otherwise. The Apex Court has held as follows:
"........ ........ ........
This is yet another case which illustrates forcibly what we have
said on many an occasion that it is not enough merely to identify
and release bonded labourers but it is equally, perhaps more,
important that after identification and release, they must be
rehabilitated, because without rehabilitation, they would be driven
by poverty, helplessness and despair into serfdom once again.
Poverty and destitution are almost perennial features of Indian
rural life for large numbers of unfortunate ill-starred humans in
this country and it would be nothing short of cruelty and
heartlessness to identify and release bonded labourers merely to
throw them at the mercy of the existing social and economic
system which denies to them even the basic necessities of life
such as food, shelter and clothing. It is obvious that poverty is a
curse inflicted on large masses of people by our malfunctioning
socio-economic structure and it has the disastrous effect of
corroding the soul and sapping the moral fibre of a human being
by robbing him of all basic human dignity and destroying in him
the higher values and the finer susceptibilities which go to make
3
(1984) 3 SCC 243
62
up this wonderful creation of God upon earth, namely, man. It
does not mean mere inability to buy the basic necessities of life
but it goes much deeper; it deprives a man of all opportunities of
education and advancement and increases a thousand fold his
vulnerability to misfortunes which come to him all too often and
which he is not able to withstand on account of lack of social and
material resources. We, who have not experienced poverty and
hunger, want and destitution, talk platitudiously of freedom and
liberty but these words have no meaning for a person who has
not even a square meal per day, hardly a roof over his head and
scarcely one piece of cloth to cover his shame. What use are
'identification' and 'release' to bonded labourers if after
attaining their so-called freedom from bondage to a master
they are consigned to a life of another bondage, namely,
bondage to hunger and starvation where they have nothing
to hope for -- not even anything to die for -- and they do
not know whether they will be able to secure even a
morsel of food to fill the hungry stomachs of their starving
children. What would they prize more: freedom and liberty
with hunger and destitution staring them in the face or
some food to satisfy their hunger and the hunger of their
near and dear ones, even at the cost of freedom and
liberty? The answer is obvious. It is therefore imperative
that neither the Government nor the Court should be
content with merely securing identification and release of
bounded labourers but every effort must be made by them
to see that the freed bonded labourers are properly and
suitably rehabilitated after identification and release.
2. This issue of rehabilitation of freed bonded labourers
arises squarely in the present writ petition. The writ petition
is based upon a letter dated September 20, 1982 addressed to
one of the Judges of this Court by the petitioner who is Civil
Rights Correspondent of Statesman a leading newspaper in the
country. This letter was directed to be treated as a writ petition
but for the sake of completness, before notice was issued to the
respondent, Mr Govind Mukhoty, learned advocate who was good
enough to accede to the request of the Court to appear on behalf
of the petitioner, filed a regular writ petition in substitution of this
letter and it is that writ petition which is now being disposed of by
us. The petitioner averred in the writ petition that about 135
bonded labourers who were working in the stone quarries in
63
Faridabad had been released from bondage by an order made by
this Court in the first week of March, 1982 since they were found
to be bonded labourers within the meaning of the Bonded Labour
System (Abolition) Act, 1976 and on release, they had been
brought back to their respective villages in Bilaspur District of the
State of Madhya Pradesh with a promise of rehabilitation by the
Chief Minister of that State. But, said the petitioner, when the
visited three villages, namely, Kunda, Pandharia and Bhairavpura
in Mungeli Taluk of Bilaspur District in September, 1982 with a
view to ascertaining whether or not the process of rehabilitation
as promised by the Chief Minister had commenced, she found that
most of the released bonded labourers who belonged to these
three villages had hot yet been rehabilitated though about six
months had passed since their release and they were living
almost on the verge of starvation. It may be pointed out that out
of 135 released bonded labourers, about 75 belonged to these
three villages and 45 out of them were from village Kunda. It is
also significant to note that all the 75 released bonded labourers
from these three villages belonged to Scheduled Castes. The
petitioner annexed to the writ petition a copy of an article written
by her and published in the issue of Statesman dated September
14, 1982 in which she set out how these released bonded
labourers were without land and work, facing immense hardship
and near-starvation in the absence of any rehabilitation
assistance provided by the State Government. This article written
by the petitioner setting out what she personally observed in the
course of her visit to the three villages, namely, Kunda, Pandharia
and Bhairavpura discloses a distressing state of affairs which
shows how utterly callous and indifferent can the administrative
machinery of the State Government be towards the plight of the
released bonded labourers despite assurance of rehabilitation
given by the Chief Minister. It seems that once these freed
bonded labourers were brought back to their villages, the
administration of the State Government thought they had
discharged their duty and then they conveniently forgot about the
existence of these unfortunate specimen of humanity. The fate
which befell these released bonded labourers after their
repatriation to their respective villages is perhaps symptomatic of
what is happening to bonded labourers in other parts of the
country. In the first place, very little attention is paid towards
identification and release of bonded labourers and even if they are
freed, there is complete neglect of rehabilitation programme for
them with the result that from slavery they go back to starvation.
64
That is why when the petitioner interviewed some of these
bonded labourers they said that they would rather go back to the
stone quarries for work than starve and added: "we might have
been killed there, but we are also dying here". It is interesting to
find that according to the information gathered by the petitioner,
more than 100 years ago 90 per cent of the land was owned by
Satnamis while now they own less than 50 per cent The petitioner
pointed out in the writ petition that some of these released
bonded labourers owned land at one time but they had lost it to
the Sahukars, that is, the money-lenders and some of them had
pledged their jewellery and other small belongings in order to
raise money for their subsistence. Some of these released bonded
labourers were, according to the petitioner, going to the Bhadora
forest to get bamboo and wood which they would sell and they
had to walk 10 kms carrying head loads weighing 20 kgs. and
more which would fetch them up to Rs 10 to Rs 15, though, if
they were caught by the forest guards or policemen in this
process, they would have to part with three or four days'
earnings. The petitioner said that there were various schemes of
the Government for the purpose of providing rehabilitation
assistance to freed bonded labourers and there were also the
Integrated Rural Development Plan and the 20-Point Economic
Programme but "the benefits had been cornered by those with
political influence and the well to-do in the villages". The
petitioner urged in the writ petition that it was the
obligation of the State Government to ensure rehabilitation
of freed bonded labourers under the provisions of the
Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 and its failure
to provide such rehabilitation assistance amounted to
violation of the fundamental right of the freed bonded
labourers under Article 21 of the Constitution. The petitioner
therefore prayed for a direction to the State Government to take
steps for the economic and social rehabilitation of the freed
bonded labourers who were released as a result of the order
made by this Court in the first week of March, 1982 and who were
residing in various villages in Bilaspur District.
3. When this writ petition came up for preliminary hearing
before the Court, notice was issued to the State Government and
the State Government was directed to "inform the Court at the
next hearing of the writ petition as to whether they have framed
any scheme or schemes for rehabilitation of bonded labourers,
65
whether any Vigilance Committees have been constituted in the
District of Bilaspur and whether any and if so what steps have
been taken or are being taken for rehabilitating 135 workers who
were released by the order made by this Court in the first week of
March, 1982 and who are now living in the three villages, namely,
Kunda, Pandharia and Bhairavpura in Mungeli Taluk of Bilaspur
District". Pursuant to this direction given by the Court, the State
Government filed the counter-affidavit of one G.R. Mahajan,
Asstt. Labour Commissioner at Bilaspur setting out what steps
had been taken and were being taken by the State Government
for identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers.
The State Government pointed out that "very often vested
interests veil successfully the status of bonded labourers and thus
obstruct the process of identification, the labourers themselves
are not educated enough to come forward and lodge a complaint:
they appear to be reconciled themselves to their fate" and that is
why there is a wide gap between legal discharge of bonded
labourers and their factual liberation. The State Government
observed that all District Magistrates in the State were conferred
powers under Section 10 of the Act and powers of Judicial
Magistrate First Class for the trial of offences under Section 21 of
the Act were also conferred on all District Magistrates and sub-
Divisional Magistrates and repeated instructions were issued to
the District Magistrates to identify bonded labourers. The State
Government also pointed out that Vigilance Committees had been
constituted by it in all the 44 districts of the State as required by
Section 13 of the Act. The State Government also set out the
composition of the Vigilance Committee for the Bilaspur District as
also of the Vigilance Committees for the sub-divisions of Bilaspur,
Jangjir, Katghora, Sakti and Mungeli. These Vigilance
Committees, according to the particulars given by the State
Government, included three non-Government nominees, but the
performance of these Vigilance Committees appeared to be rather
dismal, because on the admission of the State Government itself
the number of bonded labourers identified, freed and rehabilitated
in the whole of the State could not but be regarded as ridiculously
low. The figures given by the State Government in the affidavit of
G.R. Mahajan showed that in all 1531 bonded labourers were
identified in the year 1978, 75 in the year 1980, 57 in the year
1981 and 114 in the year 1982 and even in regard to these freed
bonded labourers, the State Government was not in a position to
state definitely that they had been rehabilitated but all that the
State Government could say was that "steps were taken for their
66
rehabilitation". It is absurd to suggest that in the whole of
the State there were only about 1800 bonded labourers
and they were all freed in the course of four years, leaving
no more bonded labourers in the State. It is significant to
note that apart from the present writ petition, several
other cases have come before this Court from Madhya
Pradesh by way of public interest litigation initiated by
social action groups engaged in the task of identification,
release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers and the
reports of the Commissioners, appointed by this Court in
some of those cases have clearly shown that there is a
sizable number of bonded labourers in the State who have
yet to be identified, released and rehabilitated. But the
absurdly insignificant figures of bonded labourers in the
State who have yet to be identified, released and
rehabilitated. But the absurdly insignificant figures of
bonded labourers identified and released by the State
administration so far are clearly indicative of the
indifference and inadequacy of the State administration in
securing identification, release and rehabilitation of
bonded labourers within the State. Perhaps this
indifference and inadequacy of the State administration
arises from the fact that the State Government is not
willing to admit the existence of bonded labour within its
territory lest it might affect its image and moreover the
officers of the State administration seem to be taking the
view that unless a workman is able to show that he is
forced to provide labour to the employer in consideration
of an advance or for any other economic consideration
received by him, he cannot be regarded as a bonded
labourer within the meaning of the definition of that term
in the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1956. But,
having regard to the decision of this Court in Bandhua
Mukti Morcha v. Union of India [(1984) 3 SCC 161 : 1984
SCC (L&S) 389] , it is clear that this view on which the
officers of the State administration seem to be relying for
the purpose of disputing the existence of bonded labour is
erroneous. We have pointed out in our judgment
in Bandhua Mukti Morcha case [(1984) 3 SCC 161 : 1984
SCC (L&S) 389] that:
"It would be cruel to insist that a bonded labourer in
order to derive the benefits of this social welfare
67
legislation, should have to go through a formal process of
trial with the normal procedure for recording of evidence.
That would be a totally futile process because it is obvious
that a bonded labourer can never stand up to the rigidity
and formalism of the legal process due to his poverty,
illiteracy and social and economic backwardness and if such
a procedure were required to be followed, the State
Government might as well obliterate this Act from the
statute book. It is now statistically established that most of
bonded labourers are members of Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes or other backward classes and ordinary
course of human affairs would show, indeed judicial notice
can be taken of it, that there would be no occasion for a
labourer to be placed in a situation where he is required to
supply forced labour for no wage or for nominal wage,
unless he has received some advance or other economic
consideration from the employer and under the pretext of
not having returned such advance or other economic
consideration, he is required to render service to the
employer or is deprived of his freedom of employment or of
the right to move freely wherever he wants. Therefore,
whenever it is shown that a labourer is made to provide
forced labour, the Court would raise a presumption that he
is required to do so in consideration of an advance or other
economic consideration received by him and he is therefore
a bonded labourer. This presumption may be rebutted by
the employer and also by the State Government if it so
chooses but unless and until satisfactory material is
produced for rebutting this presumption, the Court must
proceed on the basis that the labourer is a bonded labourer
entitled to the benefit of the provisions of the Act. The
State Government cannot be permitted to repudiate its
obligation to identify, release and rehabilitate the bonded
labourers on the plea that though the concerned labourers
may be providing forced labour, the State Government does
not owe any obligation to them unless and until they show
in an appropriate legal proceeding conducted according to
the Rules of adversary system of justice, that they are
bonded labourers."
This is the test which has to be applied for the purpose
of determining whether a workman is a bonded labourer or
not and we would therefore direct the State Government to
apply this test throughout its territory for the purpose of
ascertaining whether there are any bonded labourers or
not and if so how large is their number. Whenever it is
68
found that any workman is forced to provide labour for no
remuneration or nominal remuneration, the presumption
would be that he is a bonded labourer unless the employer
or the State Government is in a position to prove otherwise
by rebutting such presumption.
4. The State Government also pointed out in the affidavit of
G.R. Mahajan that instructions had been issued to all the
Collectors and Commissioners to give widest possible publicity to
the evil of the bonded labour system and the cooperation of the
members of the Legislative Assembly was also sought in this vital
task of identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded
labourers and all the panchayats in the State were also asked to
cooperate with the State Government in this behalf. The State
Government observed in the affidavit that it had also announced
an award of Rs 25 to those who give information about the
existence of bonded labour. It is difficult to believe that the
existence of bonded labour can be discovered and the evil of
bonded labour can be wiped out by relying solely on action to be
taken by the members of the Legislative Assembly or the
bureaucracy or even the panchayats though their help must
certainly be sought and taken. The Commissioners and Collectors
have multifarious duties to attend and even if they are anxious to
help in eradication of the vice of bonded labour system, which we
are sure they are, they would not find time to make any personal
enquiry or investigation but they would have to rely on their
subordinate officers such as tehsildars and patwaris and at many
places, the patwaris and tehsildars being either in sympathy with
the exploiting class or lacking in social commitment or indifferent
to the misery and suffering of the poor and the downtrodden, the
task of identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labour
through the official machinery would be very difficult of
achievement. So also the members of the Legislative Assembly,
though extremely sincere and well meaning and having the
welfare of the poor at heart, would, barring perhaps in a few
cases, hardly have time to carry out any enquiry or investigation
for the purpose of identification and release of bonded labourers.
The panchayats also, dominated as they sometimes are, by
vested interests, and having regard to their mode of functioning,
may not be very effective in this task. What is really necessary is
to involve social action groups operating at the grass roots level
in the task of identification and release of bonded labourers. We
69
do not think much useful purpose will be served by asking petty
officials of the Revenue Department to go from house to house
with a view to ascertaining whether there are any bonded
labourers or not. We had some time back a case before us where
pursuant to a direction given by the Collector as a result of an
order made by this Court, the tehsildar went to the villages in
question and sitting on a dias with the landlords by his side, he
started enquiring of the labourers whether they were bonded or
not and when the labourers, obviously inhibited and terrified by
the presence of the landlords, said that they were not bonded but
they were working freely and voluntarily, he made a report to the
Collector that there were no bonded labourers. It is only through
social action groups working amongst the poor that we shall be
able to discover the existence of bonded labour and we shall be
able to identify and release them. There are fortunately in our
country a large number of such dedicated social action groups --
young men and women inspired by idealism and moved by a
passionate and burning zeal to help their fellow beings -- whose
services can be utilised for identification, release and
rehabilitation of bonded labourers. We would strongly urge upon
the State Government to include the representatives of such
social action groups in the Vigilance Committees and to give them
full support and cooperation. These social action groups may
appear to be unorthodox and unconventional and their actions
may be marked by a sense of militancy, but they alone will be
able to deliver the goods and it is high time that the State
Government should start taking their assistance instead of looking
at them askance and distrusting them. The vested interests would
undoubtedly be against such social action groups which are trying
to organise the poor and the oppressed and would try to attack
and destroy such social action groups with all the resources at
their disposal including filing of false cases and even physical
assaults but the State administration should not allow itself to be
dominated or influenced by the vested interests and under the
guise of maintenance of law and order, harass and oppress the
disadvantaged sections of the community whom such social action
groups are trying to organise with a view to making them strong
and self-reliant and capable of fighting for their rights through the
process of law. We would therefore direct the State Government
to include in the Vigilance Committee for Bilaspur District, as also
in the Vigilance Committees of the various sub-divisions in that
district, representatives of one or more of the following social
70
action groups which are operating in one or the other part of that
district:
(1) Shri Sita Ram Kashyap, Advocate, "Lahar",
Janajgeer Tehsil, District Bilaspur.
(2) Shri Chandran, "Lahar", Near Korba, Bhainsa Munda,
District Bilaspur.
(3) Shri J.R. Sachdev, Prayog Samaj Sevi Sanstha, P.O.
Tilda, Neora, District Raipur-493114, Madhya Pradesh.
We expect the State Government to carry out this direction
within one month from today. We would also direct the State
Government to take immediate action for identification and
release of bonded labourers, whenever any representative of
these social action groups, whether on the Vigilance Committee or
not, points out to the Collector/District Magistrate or the Deputy
Collector that there is existence of bonded labour at a particular
place and whenever any officer of the district administration goes
to such place for identification and release of bonded labour on
the basis of the information given by such representative of the
social action group, he shall take such representative with him
and a copy of the report made by him shall be handed over
immediately to such representative of the social action group. We
may make it clear that this direction given by us should not be
interpreted to mean that the representatives of only those social
action groups which are mentioned by us should be taken on the
Vigilance Committees, but it will be open to the State Government
to include in the Vigilance Committees representatives of any
other social action groups which the State Government may think
fit, having regard to the nature and quality of the work done by
them at the grass roots level amongst the have-nots and the
handicapped.
5. It appears that a review of the action taken by the State
Government for the purpose of identification, release and
rehabilitation of bonded labourers was undertaken in April, 1981
and a detailed survey was carried out in the Districts of Satna,
Panna, Bastar, Raigarh and Jabalpur. The learned Counsel
appearing on behalf of the State Government has filed a summary
of conclusions and recommendations of this review and this
summary frankly and boldly exposes the inadequacies of the
71
State administration in regard to the implementation of the
programme of identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded
labourers and makes constructive suggestions and
recommendations for remedying the existing state of affairs. We
hope and trust that these suggestions and recommendations will
be immediately carried out by the State Government and the
entire machinery for identification, release and rehabilitation of
bonded labourers will be streamlined in the light of these
suggestions and recommendations. We do not think that it would
be right for us to discuss these suggestions and recommendations
because they involve administrative policy-making but there are a
few observations we would like to make arising out of some of
these suggestions and recommendations. One of the suggestions
and recommendations made by the survey team is that: "the
district and sub-divisional level Vigilance Committees should
be reorganised and activated and their meetings should be more
frequent than now". This suggestion or recommendation clearly
supports what we have said in the preceding paragraphs of this
judgment, namely, that the Vigilance Committees as they exist
today are not effective and they need to be reorganised and
activated. We have no doubt that the direction given by us to
include representatives of social action groups will go a long way
towards activising the functioning of the Vigilance Committees. It
is also necessary that officers who are posted at different
levels to deal with the problems of bonded labour including
their identification, release and rehabilitation should be
properly trained and sensitised so that they may feel a
sense of involvement with the misery and suffering of the
poor and they may carry out their functions with total
dedication to the cause of removal of poverty and in a
manner which will inspire the confidence of the weaker
sections of the community including the bonded labour.
Every officer who is placed in charge of identification,
release and rehabilitation of bonded labour should be
made fully conscious of his great responsibility and he
should be imbued with a sense of purpose and dedication
which are necessary if this important task is to be
accomplished successfully. It is also essential that there
should be constant check and supervision over the
activities of the officers charged with the task of securing
identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded
labourers. We have fortunately in our country quite a large
number of socially committed officers who, inspired by idealism
72
with their enthusiasm undiminished, minds untrammelled and
hearts unpolluted by all kinds of pressures, are prepared to brave
opposition and sometimes even danger, in order to help the
deprived and vulnerable sections of the community. Such officers
must be encouraged and their efforts appreciated so that they
may become exemplary models for other officers to follow. The
summary of conclusions and recommendations in para 7 suggests
that "an intensive survey of the area which has been traditionally
prone to the system of debt bondage should be undertaken by the
Revenue Department with the help of the available field agencies
for the identification of bonded labourers". We would introduce a
slight modification to this recommendation and we would suggest
that an intensive survey of the areas which have been
traditionally prone to the system of debt bondage should
undoubtedly be undertaken but that should be done by the
Vigilance Committees with the assistance of social action groups
operating in such areas and that is perhaps what the survey team
had in mind when they said that the help of "available field
agencies" should be taken by the Revenue Department. We find
ourselves wholly in agreement with the suggestions and
recommendations set out in para 9 to 17 of the summary of
conclusions and recommendations. We have no doubt that if
these suggestions and recommendations are sincerely and
speedily implemented by the State Government, it would go a
long way towards rehabilitation of the released bonded labourers.
We have plenty of good schemes in our country but the real
difficulty lies in securing their proper and effective
implementation. The evaluation of the implementation of these
schemes must be target-oriented and not expenditure-oriented.
What is necessary is that the benefits of the expenditure must
reach the masses and particularly the lowest amongst the low and
the weakest among the weak, because they constitute the target
groups sought to be benefited and if the benefits do not reach
them, it is futile for any Government to say that it has expended
such large amount. We would therefore urge upon the State
Government to immediately take up the implementation of
the suggestions and recommendations made by the survey
team in its report and inform the Court by an affidavit to be
filed by a responsible officer on or before July 31, 1984 as
to what concrete steps have been taken towards
implementation of these suggestions and
recommendations and how many bonded labourers have
been identified and freed and how many of them have been
73
rehabilitated and in what manner. It is the plainest
requirement of Articles 21 and 23 of the Constitution that
bonded labourers must be identified and released and on
release, they must be suitably rehabilitated. The Bonded
Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 has been enacted
pursuant to the Directive Principles of State Policy with a
view to ensuring basic human dignity to the bonded
labourers and any failure of action on the part of the State
Government in implementing the provisions of this
legislation would be the clearest violation of Article 21
apart from Article 23 of the Constitution.
........ ........ ........
9. These orders have been passed and directions have
been given so that responsibility and legal obligations of
the respondent in the matter of properly rehabilitating
bonded labourers freed from bondage may be duly
discharged. Bonded labour system had been one of the vile
systems which had been degenerating human beings for
years. Appreciating the unjust, immoral and pernicious
nature of this system, our country which values human
dignity and guarantees personal freedom had passed
appropriate legislation to do away with this system. The
Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, abolishing
bonded labour system and making various other provisions
including provisions for the rehabilitation of bonded
labourers was enacted. It is indeed sad and unfortunate
that though this piece of welfare legislation was passed
years ago, no proper steps were being taken for
implementation of the same. Various social organisations
and individuals working for the upliftment of the poor,
weak and the downtrodden had brought to the notice of
the Court the pitiable plight in very many parts of our
country of the bonded labourers who were being exploited
and held in bondage notwithstanding the passing of the
Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976. Suitable
action had been taken by the Court for freeing bonded
labourers from bondage and restoring to them the liberty
guaranteed under the Constitution in all appropriate cases.
Action taken by the Court had the effect of creating an
awareness not only in the minds of the sufferers but had
74
also helped to an extent in removing the inertia and
lethargy in the administration which started taking
appropriate steps for implementation of the provisions of
this eminently beneficial social welfare legislation, either
on the basis of the directions given by the Court or on its
own initiative.
........ ........ ........
11. The provisions of the Bonded Labour System
(Abolition) Act, 1976 must be implemented effectively
and properly in terms of the provisions of the Act, if the
desired objective which the Act seeks to achieve, is to be
attained. The Legislature in its wisdom very aptly
appreciated that mere release of the bonded labourer
from bondage without making appropriate arrangements
for his rehabilitation will serve no useful purpose and
may even create a very real problem as to livelihood of
the labourer so set free and accordingly the legislation
made suitable provision for the rehabilitation of the
bonded labourer. If any bonded labourer is only freed
from his bondage and is set at liberty, he will in all
probability have to slide back into bondage again to keep
his body and soul together. Freedom from bondage
without effective rehabilitation after such freedom will
indeed be of no consequence and in the absence of
proper arrangement for such rehabilitation being made,
the entire purpose of the Act will be frustrated and the
vice of the bonded labour system which the Legislature
thought it fit to abolish in the larger interest not only of
our country, but also of humanity as a whole will
continue to perpetuate its evil existence."
8.4. The Apex Court, in a later judgment, issues direction to
all the States regarding rehabilitation of bonded labourers in
PUBLIC UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES v. STATE OF TAMIL
NADU4 as follows:
4
(2004) 12 SCC 381
75
"........ ........ ........
4. After going through the detailed report of the Expert Group,
responses to it by the Governments and that of the learned
amicus curiae, the report of NHRC and the various affidavits-on-
record, we could easily arrive at the conclusion that the major
issue that is to be solved are the aspects relating to rehabilitation
of bonded labours. Once the bonded labourers are identified
and released, they have to be rehabilitated forthwith. It is
a sad reality that the rehabilitation and related aspects of
bonded labourers have not been given adequate
consideration till now. If we are now concentrating our
attention to identification and release of bonded labourers,
they will languish in streets, if there are no well-chalked-
out corresponding plans for rehabilitation. Hence, in our
considered opinion the primary direction shall be aimed at
evolving and implementing rehabilitation plans.
5. In modern days civil society is playing a greater role in
nation-building exercise. The commendable roles played by NGOs
in very many situations strengthen the confidence of general
public in NGOs. The State may not always be in a position to
reach out to the needy. As we have experienced in the past, civil
society could efficiently fill up this gap. Now it is time for more
interaction between civil society and State machinery in
implementing social-service schemes. The services of
philanthropic organisations or NGOs could very well be utilised for
rehabilitating released bonded labourers. The State could give
necessary financial assistance under proper supervision.
6. Considering the vitality of rehabilitation issue in the
endeavour to abolish bonded labour, at this stage, we are
issuing the following directions:
1. All States and Union Territories must submit their
status report in the form prescribed by NHRC every six
months.
2. All the State Governments and Union Territories shall
constitute Vigilance Committees at the district and sub-
divisional levels in accordance with Section 13 of the Act,
within a period of six months from today.
76
3. All the State Governments and Union Territories shall
make proper arrangements for rehabilitating released
bonded labourers. Such rehabilitation could be on land-
based basis or non-land basis or skilled/craft-based basis
depending upon the choice of bonded labourer and his/her
inclination and past experience. If the States are not in a
position to make arrangements for such rehabilitation,
then it shall identify two philanthropic organisations or
NGOs with proven track record and good reputation, with
basic facilities for rehabilitating released bonded labourers
within a period of six months.
4. The State Governments and Union Territories shall
chalk out a detailed plan for rehabilitating released bonded
labourers either by itself or with the involvement of such
organisations or NGOs within a period of six months.
5. The Union and State Governments shall submit a plan
within a period of six months for sharing the money under
the modified Centrally Sponsored Scheme, in the case
where the States wish to involve such organisations or
NGOs.
6. The State Governments and Union Territories shall
make arrangements to sensitise the District Magistrate and
other statutory authorities/committees in respect of their
duties under the Act.
7. The Union and State Governments are directed to file
affidavits delineating the above aspects within a period of six
months. All other aspects pointed out by NHRC and other
directions suggested to be issued by the learned amicus curiae
would be considered thereafter."
8.5. Later, in SUKANYA SHANTHA v. UNION OF INDIA5
the Apex Court holds as follows:
5
(2024) 15 SCC 535
77
"........ ........ ........
103. What emerges from the above discussion is that the
broad scope of Article 23 can be invoked to challenge
practices where no wages are paid, non-payment of
minimum wages takes place, social security measures for
workers are not adopted, rehabilitation for bonded labour
does not happen, and in similar unfair practices. The State
shall be held accountable even in cases where the violation
of fundamental rights such as Article 23 is done by private
entities or individuals. Article 23 can also be applied to
situations inside prisons, if the prisoners are subjected to
degrading labour or other similar oppressive practices."
(Emphasis supplied at each instance)
The Apex Court, in all these cases, highlights that the bonded
labour system should be stopped and that such bonded labourers
should be rehabilitated wherever they are working, in any part of
the country. If the facts obtaining in the case at hand are
considered on the bedrock of the principles laid down by the Apex
court, the order passed by the District Magistrate, which records
that the petitioners are being used as labourers, whether bonded or
otherwise has blatantly ignored the law laid down by the Apex
Court.
9. The Statute i.e., the Bonded Labour System (Abolition)
Act, 1976 clearly brings about as to how a bonded labour should be
recognized, stopped and how the perpetrators should be punished.
78
Certain provisions of the Act are germane to be considered. They
read as follows:
"2. Definitions.--In this Act, unless the context
otherwise requires,--
(a) "advance" means an advance, whether in cash or in
kind, or partly in cash or partly in kind, made by one person
(hereinafter referred to as the creditor) to another person
(hereinafter referred to as the debtor);
(b) "agreement" means an agreement (whether written
or oral, or partly written and partly oral) between a debtor and
creditor, and includes an agreement providing for forced labour,
the existence of which is presumed under any social custom
prevailing in the concerned locality.
.... .... ....
(d) "bonded debt" means an advance obtained, or
presumed to have been obtained, by a bonded labourer under,
or in pursuance of, the bonded labour system;
(e) "bonded labour" means any labour or service
rendered under the bonded labour system;
(f) "bonded labourer" means a labourer who incurs, or
has, or is presumed to have, incurred, a bonded debt;
(g) "bonded labour system" means the system of forced,
or partly forced, labour under which a debtor enters, or has, or
is presumed to have, entered, into an agreement with the
creditor to the effect that--
(i) in consideration of an advance obtained by him or by
any of his lineal ascendants or descendants (whether
or not such advance is evidenced by any document)
and in consideration of the interest, if any, due on
such advance, or
79
(ii) in pursuance of any customary or social obligation, or
(iii) in pursuance of any obligation devolving on him by
succession, or
(iv) for any economic consideration received by him or by
any of his lineal ascendants or descendants, or
(v) by reason of his birth in any particular caste or
community,
he would--
(1) render, by himself or through any member of his
family, or any person dependent on him, labour or
service, to the creditor, or for the benefit of the
creditor, for a specified period or for an unspecified
period, either without wages or for nominal wages, or
(2) forfeit the freedom of employment or other means of
livelihood for a specified period or for an unspecified
period, or
(3) forfeit the right to move freely throughout the territory
of India, or
(4) forfeit the right to appropriate or sell at market-value
any of his property or product of his labour or the
labour of a member of his family or any person
dependent on him.
and includes the system of forced, or partly forced, labour
under which a surety for a debtor enters, or has, or is presumed
to have, entered into an agreement with the creditor to the
effect that in the event of the failure of the debtor to repay the
debt, he would render the bonded labour on behalf of the
debtor;
[Explanation.--For the removal of doubts, it is hereby
declared that any system of forced, or partly forced labour
under which any workman being contract labour as defined in
clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 2 of the Contract Labour
80
(Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (37 of 1970), or an inter-
State migrant workman as defined in clause (e) of sub-section
(1) of Section 2 of the Inter-State Migrant Workmen (Regulation
of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1979 (30 of
1979), is required to render labour or service in circumstances
of the nature mentioned in sub-clause (1) of this clause or is
subjected to all or any of the disabilities referred to in sub-
clauses (2) to (4), is 'bonded labour system', within the
meaning of this clause.]
.... .... ....
(i) "nominal wages", in relation to any labour, means a
wage which is less than,--
4. Abolition of bonded labour system.--(1) On the
commencement of this Act, the bonded labour system shall
stand abolished and every bonded labourer shall, on such
commencement, stand freed and discharged from any obligation
to render any bonded labour.
(2) After the commencement of this Act, no person
shall--
(a) make any advance under, or in pursuance of, the
bonded labour system, or
(b) compel any person to render any bonded labour or
other form of forced labour.
.... .... ....
Chapter IV deals with the implementing authorities. Section 10
provides for the authorities for implementation of the Act:
"10. Authorities who may be specified for
implementing the provisions of this Act.--The State
Government may confer such powers and impose such duties on
a District Magistrate as may be necessary to ensure that the
provisions of this Act are properly carried out and the District
81
Magistrate may specify the officer, subordinate to him, who
shall exercise all or any of the powers, and perform all or any of
the duties, so conferred or imposed and the local limits within
which such powers or duties shall be carried out by the officer
so specified."
Section 11 imposes a duty on the District Magistrate or any
authorised person to secure and protect the bonded labour and
promote his/her interests:
"11. Duty of District Magistrate and other officers to
ensure credit.--The District Magistrate authorised by the State
Government under Section 10 and the officer specified by the
District Magistrate under that section shall, as far as practicable,
try to promote the welfare of the freed bonded labourer by
securing and protecting the economic interests of such bonded
labourer so that he may not have any occasion or reason to
contract any further bonded debt."
Section 12 imposes a duty on the District Magistrate to inquire
into whether any form of bonded labour system or other forms
of forced labour was being practised:
"12. Duty of District Magistrate and officers
authorised by him.--It shall be the duty of every District
Magistrate and every officer specified by him under Section 10
to inquire whether, after the commencement of this Act, any
bonded labour system or any other form of forced labour is
being enforced by, or on behalf of, any person resident within
the local limits of his jurisdiction and if, as a result of such
inquiry, any person is found to be enforcing the bonded labour
system or any other system of forced labour, he shall forthwith
take such action as may be necessary to eradicate the
enforcement of such forced labour."
82
Chapter V deals with vigilance committees. Section 13 deals with
the constitution of a vigilance committee:
"13. Vigilance Committees.--(1) Every State
Government shall, by notification in the Official Gazette,
constitute such number of Vigilance Committees in each district
and each Sub-Division as it may think fit.
(2) Each Vigilance Committee, constituted for a district, shall
consist of the following members, namely--
(a) the District Magistrate, or a person nominated by him,
who shall be the Chairman;
(b) three persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes or
Scheduled Tribes and residing in the District, to be
nominated by the District Magistrate;
(c) two social workers, resident in the district, to be
nominated by the District Magistrate;
(d) not more than three persons to represent the official
or non-official agencies in the district connected with
rural development, to be nominated by the State
Government;
(e) one person to represent the financial and credit
institutions in the district, to be nominated by the
District Magistrate;
(3) Each Vigilance Committee, constituted for a Sub-Division,
shall consist of the following members, namely--
(a) the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, or a person nominated
by him, who shall be the Chairman;
(b) three persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes or
Scheduled Tribes and residing in the Sub-Division, to
be nominated by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate;
83
(c) two social workers, resident in the Sub-Division to be
nominated by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate;
(d) not more than three persons to represent the official
or non-official agencies in the Sub-Division connected
with rural development to be nominated by the District
Magistrate;
(e) one person to represent the financial and credit
institutions in the Sub-Division, to be nominated by
the Sub-Divisional Magistrate;
(f) one officer specified under Section 10 and functioning
in the Sub-Division.
(4) Each Vigilance Committee shall regulate its own procedure
and secretarial assistance, as may be necessary, shall be
provided by--
(a) the District Magistrate, in the case of a Vigilance
Committee constituted for the district;
(b) the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, in the case of a
Vigilance Committee constituted for the Sub-Division.
(5) No proceeding of a Vigilance Committee shall be invalid
merely by reason of any defect in the constitution, or in the
proceedings, of the Vigilance Committee."
Section 14 deals with the function of the vigilance committee
which includes providing economic and social rehabilitation of
the freed bonded labourers:
"14. Functions of Vigilance Committees.--(1) The
functions of each Vigilance Committee shall be,--
(a) to advise the District Magistrate or any officer
authorised by him as to the efforts made, and action
84
taken, to ensure that the provisions of this Act or of
any rule made thereunder are properly implemented;
(b) to provide for the economic and social rehabilitation of
the freed bonded labourers;
(c) to co-ordinate the functions of rural banks and co-
operative societies with a view to canalising adequate
credit to the freed bonded labourer;
(d) to keep an eye on the number of offences of which
cognizance has been taken under this Act;
(e) to make a survey as to whether there is any offence of
which cognizance ought to be taken under this Act;
(f) to defend any suit instituted against a freed bonded
labourer or a member of his family or any other
person dependent on him for the recovery of the
whole or part of any bonded debt or any other debt
which is claimed by such person to be bonded debt.
(2) A Vigilance Committee may authorise one of its members to
defend a suit against a freed bonded labourer and the member
so authorised shall be deemed, for the purpose of such suit, to
be the authorised agent of the freed bonded labourer."
Section 15 provides for the burden of proof and states that
whenever any debt is claimed by a bonded labourer or by a
Vigilance Committee, to be a bonded debt, the burden of proof
that such debt is not a bonded debt shall lie on the creditor:
"15. Burden of proof.--Whenever any debt is claimed
by a bonded labourer, or a Vigilance Committee, to be a bonded
debt, the burden of proof that such debt is not a bonded debt
shall lie on the creditor."
85
Chapter VI deals with offences and trial, Section 16 punishes the
enforcement of bonded labour:
"16. Punishment for enforcement of bonded
labour.--Whoever, after the commencement of this Act,
compels any person to render any bonded labour shall be
punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to
three years and also with fine which may extend to two
thousand rupees."
Section 17 punishes the advancement of bonded debt:
"17. Punishment for advancement of bonded debt.--
Whoever advances, after the commencement of this Act, any
bonded debt shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term
which may extend to three years and also with fine which may
extend to two thousand rupees."
Section 18 punishes the extraction of bonded labour under the
bonded labour system:
"18. Punishment for extracting bonded labour under
the bonded labour system.--Whoever enforces, after the
commencement of this Act, any custom, tradition, contract,
agreement or other instrument, by virtue of which any person or
any member of the family of such person or any dependant of
such person is required to render any service under the bonded
labour system, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term
which may extend to three years and also with fine which may
extend to two thousand rupees; and, out of the fine, if
recovered, payment shall be made to the bonded labourer at the
rate of rupees five for each day for which the bonded labour was
extracted from him."
86
Section 20 punishes the abetment of any offence under the Act.
"20. Abetment to be an offence.--Whoever abets any offence
punishable under this Act shall, whether or not the offence
abetted is committed, be punishable with the same punishment
as is provided for the offence which has been abetted.
Explanation.--For the purpose of this Act, "abetment" has the
meaning assigned to it in the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)."
The Government of India, has put in place, a SOP for
implementation of Act. As per the SOP, on receiving a complaint,
the District Magistrate is required to ensure that the bonded labour
is rescued within 24 hours. In terms of Section 15 of the Act
presumption is in favour of the bonded labourer. Clause 3.3 of the
Scheme deals with manner in which the enquiry is to be conducted.
The enquiry is not conducted in the manner in which it is stipulated.
The representations made to the authorities were lucid bringing out
how the petitioners were being used as bonded labour. The enquiry
conducted by the Tahsildar and the order passed by the District
Magistrate are all contrary to the provisions of the Act and the
judgments rendered by the Apex Court quoted supra.
87
10. In that light, the order of the District Magistrate is to be
obliterated and the matter is remitted back to the hands of the
District Magistrate to reconsider the issue and pass necessary order
in accordance with law, for which a fresh inspection of the area
where the petitioners are working is to be conducted in the
presence of the stakeholders wherever it is, in strict consonance
with the directions of the Apex Court and the provisions of the Act.
The benefits that the petitioners have sought would flow from the
inspection that is now directed to be conducted afresh and the
order to be passed by the District Magistrate based upon the
inspection report as afore-directed.
11. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER
(i) Writ Petition is allowed in part.
(ii) The order dated 05-02-2022 passed by the District
Magistrate, Belagavi stands quashed. As a matter of
form, the report of the Tahsildar dated 24-01-2022 also
stands quashed.
(iii) The District Magistrate shall now cause an inspection to
be conducted by the Tahsildar, different from the one
who conducted the earlier inspection, who shall draw a
report, bearing in mind the observations made in the
course of the order.
(iv) The inspection shall be carried out within four weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The
District Magistrate shall consider the report and pass
necessary orders in accordance with law, within eight
weeks thereafter.
SD/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA)
JUDGE
Bkp
CT:SS
