Acquittals equal convictions in bonded labour cases

CHENNAI: Rescued bonded labourers in Tamil Nadu often face another battle in court – prolonged trials, missing evidence and difficulties in securing victims’ testimony that lead to a weak prosecution.

“Rescuing workers and identifying them as bonded labourers is only part of the process. To secure a conviction, investigators must prove how the workers were exploited and establish the role of each accused. But gaps in evidence, missing documents and unrecorded witness statements are weakening several cases,” said M Raja, a lawyer, Madras High Court.

In March 2025, the Principal District and Sessions Court in Chengalpattu acquitted the owner of a rice mill in Guduvanchery, where six persons belonging to the Irular community were employed as bonded labourers. The prosecution examined 15 witnesses and marked eight documents, but the court found the evidence insufficient to establish the charges.

The alleged advance payments had not been adequately proved. The Tahsildar admitted that she had not recorded the workers’ statements during inspection. The court also questioned aspects of the inspection, while the Revenue Inspector failed to produce his pocket diary, which he said he ordinarily maintained.

Another bonded labour case from Pondavakkam village in Tiruvallur, involving workers from Odisha employed at a brick chamber, had a different outcome. The defence questioned the absence of direct police complaints from the workers and the failure of investigators to record the Revenue Divisional Officer’s statement.

However, the Ponneri court found the workers’ testimony, backed by official records of their identification and release, sufficient to convict the accused under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976.

“Police often fail to collect all relevant documents during investigation, including bonded labour inquiry forms, release certificates issued by revenue officials, inspection records and correspondence between the Revenue Divisional Officer and the District Collector. Statements of the rescued workers and government officials involved in the operation must also be recorded,” Raja pointed out.

The problems continue even after the investigation. Some cases take 6-7 years to conclude, leaving a long gap between the workers’ rescue and their appearance in court. “During this period, rescued workers may migrate to their origin or other places in search of employment and settle there, making it difficult for investigators and courts to secure their attendance,” said Advocate Dennison.

By the time the trial begins, victims may also struggle to recall details of their exploitation. “Some survivors are so intimidated by court proceedings that they find it difficult even to testify. Even a well-read person will struggle to stand in the witness box,” Raja said, while recalling an instance in which a victim urinated out of fear while standing in the witness box.

Between 2022 and 2026, as many as 25 bonded labour cases resulted in convictions involving 32 persons, while 19 cases ended in acquittal involving 19 persons. Four other cases were abated, according to figures shared by the advocates who are involved in bonded labour cases.

Efforts are under way to reduce delays and strengthen prosecutions. District-level panel advocates have been appointed to follow up on cases, coordinate with victims, ensure they appear in court and help the prosecution submit documents that may have been left out.

Legal orientation programmes are also being held to explain court summons, the importance of attending hearings and how to give evidence to rescued workers.