Surendra Manjhi vs Union Of India

2026 INSC 1185
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 511 OF 2022

SURENDRA MANJHI & ANR. …PETITIONERS

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. …RESPONDENTS

WITH
WRIT PETITION (C)……….D. NO. 32325 OF 2026

J U D G M E N T

VIKRAM NATH, J.

1. The prohibition of bonded labour is among the most
fundamental assurances of human dignity embodied in our
Constitution. Freedom from bondage, however, cannot be
secured by the act of rescue alone. Unless such freedom is
accompanied by timely financial assistance and meaningful
rehabilitation, those released from exploitation may find
themselves compelled by economic necessity to return to the
very conditions from which the law sought to protect them.
The obligation of the State, therefore, extends beyond securing
their physical liberty to ensuring that such liberty is
meaningful, enduring and accompanied by the means to lead
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
SONIA BHASIN
Date: 2026.11.02
17:43:10 IST
Reason:
a life of dignity.
WP(C)NO.511/2022 ETC. 1

2. The present proceedings arise from two writ petitions
instituted under Article 32 of the Constitution of India
(hereinafter referred to as the “Constitution”), raising concerns
regarding the identification, rescue, release and rehabilitation
of bonded labourers across the country. The first petition,
being Writ Petition (Civil) No. 511 of 2022, was instituted by
Surendra Manjhi, himself a survivor of bonded labour, seeking
enforcement of the constitutional and statutory obligations of
the concerned authorities under the Bonded Labour System
(Abolition) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and
the applicable rehabilitation scheme. The petition particularly
highlights the delays in providing immediate financial
assistance to rescued bonded labourers and the deficiencies
in the institutional mechanisms responsible for their
identification and rehabilitation.
3. The connected Writ Petition (Civil) Diary No. 32325 of 2026
has been instituted by the National Campaign Committee for
the Eradication of Bonded Labour and others, raising broader
concerns regarding the continued prevalence of bonded labour
and the ineffective implementation of the statutory framework
intended for its eradication. The petition seeks, inter alia, the
establishment of uniform and enforceable procedures for
identification, rescue and rehabilitation, effective coordination
between the States and Union Territories, and appropriate
mechanisms for monitoring compliance with the obligations
imposed by law.
WP(C)NO.511/2022 ETC. 2

4. Both petitions thus raise issues which, though arising from
different circumstances, concern a common constitutional
obligation to ensure that persons subjected to bonded labour
are not merely released from exploitation but are afforded
effective protection and rehabilitation thereafter. At the
present stage, we consider it appropriate to address certain
immediate and systemic concerns requiring the intervention of
this Court, particularly those relating to uniformity in
implementation, timely disbursement of financial assistance
and coordination among the authorities concerned.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND
5. The first writ petition arises from the circumstances in which
the petitioner, Surendra Manjhi, was rescued along with
several other bonded labourers from a brick kiln in District
Shahjahanpur, Uttar Pradesh, on 28.02.2019. The labourers
had been taken from their native districts in Bihar to Uttar
Pradesh on the pretext of repayment of a bonded debt and were
allegedly subjected to exploitative working conditions.
Following their rescue, they were repatriated to Bihar and
issued release certificates by the concerned authorities.
6. Despite their release, several labourers did not receive the
immediate financial assistance contemplated under the
Central Sector Scheme for Rehabilitation of Bonded Labourers
(hereinafter referred to as the “Rehabilitation Scheme”). The
petitioner himself received such assistance only in 2022,
nearly three years after his rescue. In the rejoinder filed before
WP(C)NO.511/2022 ETC. 3

this Court, it was specifically asserted that out of 42 labourers
who had been issued release certificates, only 25 had received
immediate financial assistance of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees
Twenty thousand only) each, while the remaining 17
continued to await payment.
7. The material on record also reveals difficulties arising from the
involvement of different State authorities in the process of
rescue and rehabilitation. In particular, the State of Bihar has
highlighted instances where release certificates issued by
authorities in Uttar Pradesh were not in the prescribed format,
resulting in difficulties in processing rehabilitation assistance.
8. During the pendency of these proceedings, this Court, by order
dated 19.09.2022, observed that compensation which was
payable could be released in the meanwhile. Thereafter, by
order dated 30.08.2024, this Court took note of the
submissions made on behalf of the National Human Rights
Commission (hereinafter referred to as the “NHRC”) regarding
the formulation of a concrete proposal to address the
difficulties concerning immediate financial assistance to
rescued bonded labourers.
9. By a subsequent order dated 21.11.2024, this Court expressed
serious concern regarding the substantial number of rescued
bonded labourers who had not received financial assistance.
The Court directed the Secretary, Ministry of Labour and
Employment, Government of India, to convene a meeting with
the concerned authorities of all States and Union Territories
to formulate a proposal addressing inter-State trafficking,
WP(C)NO.511/2022 ETC. 4

issuance of release certificates and a simplified procedure for
disbursement of immediate financial assistance. The Union of
India was also directed to involve the NHRC in finalising the
proposed procedure.

10. When the matter was taken up on 21.04.2026, the learned
Attorney General for India placed before this Court a note
reflecting the steps undertaken by the concerned Ministry and
the status of the Rehabilitation Scheme. This Court directed
the Secretary, Ministry of Labour and Employment, to file an
affidavit indicating the action taken and such further
directions as may be required from this Court. Pursuant
thereto, the Union of India filed its compliance affidavit dated
15.05.2026.
11. In the meantime, Writ Petition (Civil) Diary No. 32325 of 2026
came to be instituted, raising broader concerns regarding the
implementation of the Act and the rehabilitation framework.
By order dated 18.08.2026, the said petition was directed to
be tagged with Writ Petition (Civil) No. 511 of 2022. Both
matters are accordingly being considered together.

CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY FRAMEWORK
12. Article 23 of the Constitution expressly prohibits trafficking in
human beings, begar and other similar forms of forced labour.
This prohibition, read with the guarantee of life and personal
liberty under Article 21, imposes a positive obligation upon the
State to protect individuals from exploitation and secure their
right to live with dignity. Article 24 further prohibits the
WP(C)NO.511/2022 ETC. 5

employment of children below the age of fourteen years in
factories, mines and other hazardous employment.
13. The Act was enacted to give effect to these constitutional
guarantees by abolishing the bonded labour system and
preventing the economic and physical exploitation of
vulnerable sections of society. Section 4 abolishes the bonded
labour system and releases every bonded labourer from the
obligation to render such labour. Sections 5 and 6 of the Act
further provide for the extinguishment of agreements and
liabilities arising from bonded debts. The Act also establishes
a statutory framework for its implementation. Sections 10 to
12 of the Act confer responsibilities upon the State
Governments and the District Magistrates to ensure
enforcement of its provisions, inquire into the existence of
bonded labour and take necessary measures for its
eradication. Sections 13 and 14 of the Act provide for the
constitution and functioning of Vigilance Committees at the
district and sub-divisional levels. Their functions include
advising the authorities on implementation of the Act,
facilitating the economic and social rehabilitation of released
bonded labourers and identifying violations requiring
appropriate action. These committees, therefore, constitute an
important institutional mechanism for ensuring that the
protections contemplated under the Act reach their intended
beneficiaries.
14. The statutory framework is supplemented by the
Rehabilitation Scheme, which provides for immediate financial
WP(C)NO.511/2022 ETC. 6

assistance and other rehabilitative measures for released
bonded labourers. The purpose of such assistance is to
address their immediate needs and facilitate their
reintegration into society. Its effectiveness necessarily depends
upon timely implementation by the authorities concerned.
15. This Court has consistently recognised that the constitutional
obligation towards bonded labourers does not conclude with
1
their release. In Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India
2
and Neeraja Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh , this
Court emphasised that identification, release and
rehabilitation are interconnected obligations. Mere liberation
from bondage, without adequate arrangements for
rehabilitation, would fail to secure the constitutional
guarantees under Articles 21 and 23 of the Constitution.
16. The principles emerging from these decisions make it clear
that the duty to eradicate bonded labour must be understood
as a continuing obligation. The effectiveness of the statutory
protections depends not merely upon their existence, but upon
their implementation in a manner that secures timely relief,
meaningful rehabilitation and protection against a return to
conditions of exploitation.

CONSIDERATION AND REASONS
17. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and
considered the material placed on record. The principal

1
(1984) 3 SCC 161
2
(1984) 3 SCC 243
WP(C)NO.511/2022 ETC. 7

concern arising in these proceedings is not the absence of a
statutory framework, but the difficulties encountered in its
effective implementation. The constitutional prohibition
against bonded labour and the statutory measures enacted to
enforce it cannot remain mere assurances on paper. The
release of a bonded labourer cannot be treated as the
completion of the State's obligation when the conditions
necessary for a life of dignity remain unfulfilled.
Identification, release and rehabilitation must therefore be
understood as interconnected stages of a continuing
constitutional responsibility.
18. The importance of timely rehabilitation cannot be overstated.
A person released from bonded labour is often left without an
independent source of livelihood and remains vulnerable to
further exploitation. Financial assistance intended to address
immediate needs loses much of its purpose when its
disbursement is delayed for months or years. The
circumstances of the first petitioner illustrate this difficulty.
Although rescued in 2019, he received immediate financial
assistance only in 2022. It was also submitted on the last
hearing of this matter that 17 labourers who were rescued
alongside him had still not received their financial assistance.
These circumstances demonstrate that rehabilitation
delayed may, in substance, amount to rehabilitation
denied.
19. The difficulties become more pronounced where bonded
labourers are rescued in a State other than their State of
WP(C)NO.511/2022 ETC. 8

origin. In such cases, delays in issuing release certificates,
transmitting records and processing rehabilitation benefits
frequently arise from inadequate coordination between the
concerned authorities. We are of the view that the entitlement
of a rescued labourer cannot be made dependent upon
differences in administrative practices or jurisdictional
arrangements between States. A uniform procedural
framework, prescribing definite timelines and clearly
identifying the responsibilities of the concerned authorities, is
therefore necessary to ensure consistency and accountability
throughout the country.
20. Uniformity, however, must extend beyond the prescribed
forms and administrative procedures. The process must also
be accessible to the persons for whose benefit it has been
established. Rescued labourers may be unfamiliar with the
language spoken in the State where they are identified or with
the procedures undertaken by the authorities. Their
statements must therefore be recorded with appropriate
safeguards, and information concerning their release,
entitlements and rehabilitation must be communicated in a
language they understand. Particular sensitivity is required
where children are concerned. A procedure intended to
protect vulnerable persons must be capable of being
understood and effectively accessed by them.
21. We must also emphasise the distinction between the
rehabilitation of a bonded labourer and the prosecution of
those responsible for the exploitation. Criminal proceedings
WP(C)NO.511/2022 ETC. 9

are necessary to enforce the penal provisions of the Act and
secure accountability. Immediate financial assistance, on the
other hand, is intended to address the urgent needs of the
person who has been released. Subject to the requisite
identification and verification under the applicable framework,
such assistance ought not to be withheld merely because
investigation or criminal proceedings remain pending.
Equally, the statutory responsibilities entrusted to District
Magistrates, Vigilance Committees and other authorities must
be accompanied by effective monitoring, regular reporting and
mechanisms for addressing delays.
22. Before proceeding further, we consider it appropriate to
acknowledge the constructive manner in which the present
proceedings have progressed. This is not adversarial
litigation in the conventional sense. The petitioners, the
Union of India, the concerned States and other stakeholders
share the common constitutional objective of eradicating
bonded labour and ensuring the rehabilitation of those
released from exploitation. The present proceedings also offer
a meaningful illustration of the purpose underlying Article 32
of the Constitution. The jurisdiction of this Court is not
confined to redressing individual violations of fundamental
rights, but may, in appropriate cases, facilitate the removal of
systemic deficiencies which prevent constitutional guarantees
from being effectively realised. The constructive engagement
between the State and civil society in the present matter
demonstrates the value of this constitutional remedy.
WP(C)NO.511/2022 ETC. 10

23. At the same time, we are conscious that the primary
responsibility for implementing the Act and the Rehabilitation
Scheme rests with the authorities entrusted with those
obligations. The object of judicial intervention is not to
supplant the executive in the discharge of its statutory
functions, but to ensure that the existing framework operates
effectively and in conformity with constitutional guarantees. It
is in this spirit that we consider it necessary to issue
appropriate directions aimed at securing uniformity in
implementation, timely financial assistance, effective inter-
State coordination and accountability at every stage of the
rehabilitation process.

OPERATIVE DIRECTIONS
24. We have considered the compliance affidavit dated 15.05.2026
filed by the Union of India, the suggestions subsequently
submitted by Petitioner No. 2, Bachpan Bachao Andolan and
the submissions advanced by the learned Attorney General for
India Mr. R. Venkatramani and the counsel for the Petitioners
Mr. Abhishek Jebaraj and Ms. Sanjana Grace Thomas. Having
regard to the measures proposed and the considerations
discussed above, we deem it appropriate to issue the following
directions to ensure uniform and effective implementation of
the Act and the Rehabilitation Scheme:
25. Uniform Implementation: The Union of India shall ensure
uniform implementation throughout the country of the revised
Standard Operating Procedure dated 14.05.2026, as referred
WP(C)NO.511/2022 ETC. 11

to in its compliance affidavit (hereinafter referred to as the
“SOP”). All States and Union Territories shall take necessary
steps to implement the SOP and comply with the directions
issued hereunder within six months from the date of this
order. The Union of India shall issue necessary supplementary
guidelines, in consultation with the NHRC, within three
months. The period prescribed for implementation shall not
affect any existing statutory obligation or entitlement under
the Rehabilitation Scheme.
26. Identification and Release: The uniform procedure shall
provide for prompt verification of complaints concerning
bonded labour, ordinarily within 24 hours, followed by
expeditious rescue wherever warranted. Upon identification of
bonded labour, the competent authority shall undertake the
necessary inquiry without delay and ordinarily issue the
release certificate within 24 hours of such determination.
Statements shall be recorded with appropriate safeguards,
and the release certificates and information concerning
rehabilitation entitlements shall be made available in a
language understood by the rescued persons. The Union of
India shall also prescribe a uniform format for release
certificates, which shall be recognised by all States and Union
Territories, so that differences in administrative requirements
do not obstruct the rehabilitation of rescued labourers.
27. Financial Assistance and Rehabilitation: Immediate
financial assistance admissible under the Rehabilitation
Scheme shall ordinarily be disbursed within seven days of
WP(C)NO.511/2022 ETC. 12

issuance of the release certificate, subject to necessary
verification. The concerned authorities shall prepare an
individual rehabilitation plan and initiate the applicable
rehabilitation measures within 90 days of rescue. Immediate
assistance shall not be withheld merely because investigation
or criminal proceedings remain pending, where the
requirements of the applicable scheme are otherwise satisfied.

28. Revision of the Rehabilitation Scheme: The Union of India
shall take an appropriate decision within three months on the
proposed revisions to the Rehabilitation Scheme, including
enhancement of immediate financial assistance, simplification
of rehabilitation procedures, clarification of responsibilities in
inter-State cases and the proposal for interim subsistence
assistance where rehabilitation benefits are delayed. Until
such revisions are brought into effect, disbursement shall
continue to be governed by the applicable scheme.

29. Inter-State Coordination: In cases involving rescue and
repatriation across State boundaries, the rescuing State shall
ensure timely issuance and transmission of release certificates
and other relevant records, while the receiving State shall
facilitate verification and rehabilitation. Every State and Union
Territory shall designate a nodal officer and establish an
effective mechanism for inter-State coordination within six
months. No eligible bonded labourer shall be deprived of
assistance on account of administrative differences between
the concerned States. The responsibility for disbursement of
immediate financial assistance shall be clearly assigned under
WP(C)NO.511/2022 ETC. 13

the uniform procedure, and no dispute between the concerned
States regarding such responsibility shall delay payment to an
eligible beneficiary.
30. Outstanding Assistance to the 17 Labourers: The States of
Uttar Pradesh and Bihar shall jointly verify the status of
financial assistance payable to the 17 bonded labourers
rescued alongside the first petitioner, Surendra Manjhi, who
were stated to have remained unpaid as submitted by the
learned Counsel for Petitioner no. 2 before this Court. The
verification shall be completed within one month, and any
outstanding assistance found payable shall be disbursed as
expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months and
in any event within six months from the date of this order. The
authorities shall also examine and address any outstanding
rehabilitation benefits in accordance with the applicable
scheme.

31. Vigilance Committees and Rehabilitation Funds: All States
and Union Territories shall ensure that Vigilance Committees
are duly constituted and functioning at the district and sub-
divisional levels in accordance with the Act. The Committees
shall undertake periodic reviews of identification, release and
rehabilitation of bonded labourers. The States and Union
Territories shall also ensure the availability and effective
utilisation of district-level rehabilitation funds for timely
assistance to eligible beneficiaries.
32. Digital Monitoring and Accountability: The Union of India
shall ensure effective operation of the NAVJIVAN Portal for
WP(C)NO.511/2022 ETC. 14

recording and monitoring the identification, rescue, release
and rehabilitation of bonded labourers. All States and Union
Territories shall regularly update the relevant information and
establish State-level Monitoring Committees under the
concerned Principal Secretary or Secretary to review
implementation every month. Particular attention shall be
given to cases pending for more than one year and instances
of delayed financial assistance. Appropriate safeguards shall
be maintained to protect the confidentiality of rescued
persons. Every district shall designate an officer responsible
for receiving and addressing grievances concerning non-
issuance of release certificates, delayed financial assistance
and rehabilitation benefits. Such grievances shall ordinarily be
resolved within 30 days.
33. Protection and Rehabilitation of Children: In cases
involving children, the concerned authorities shall ensure
compliance with the applicable child protection laws and
facilitate access to education, medical care, counselling and
other rehabilitative measures. The procedure adopted shall be
sensitive to their age and circumstances, and necessary
assistance shall be provided without avoidable delay.
34. Training and Enforcement: The States and Union Territories
shall undertake regular training and sensitisation
programmes for officers responsible for implementing the Act
and the Rehabilitation Scheme, including police officers and
members of Vigilance Committees. They shall also ensure
prompt action for recovery of unpaid wages and other amounts
WP(C)NO.511/2022 ETC. 15

recoverable under law. Any unjustified failure to discharge
statutory obligations or comply with the prescribed timelines
shall be examined by the appropriate supervisory authority for
necessary action in accordance with law.

35. Continuing Rehabilitation: The concerned District
Magistrates shall facilitate access to livelihood opportunities
and benefits available under existing Central and State welfare
schemes for released bonded labourers. The District Vigilance
Committees shall periodically review their rehabilitation for at
least one year following release, with particular emphasis on
preventing re-exploitation and ensuring their effective
reintegration into society.

COMPLIANCE AND FURTHER DIRECTIONS
36. The Union of India shall file a compliance affidavit within four
months from the date of this order, indicating the steps taken
pursuant to the directions issued above, including the
decisions taken regarding the proposed revisions to the
Rehabilitation Scheme and the measures adopted for ensuring
uniform implementation of the SOP.
37. All States and Union Territories shall ensure compliance with
the directions issued herein within six months from the date
of this order. Within two weeks thereafter, they shall file their
respective compliance affidavits, indicating the measures
undertaken, the status of implementation and the reasons for
any outstanding deficiencies. The Union of India shall also
WP(C)NO.511/2022 ETC. 16

place on record a consolidated status report regarding
compliance by the States and Union Territories.
38. Having regard to the gravity of the issues involved and the
need for continued monitoring by this Court to ensure effective
implementation of the directions issued herein, we do not
consider it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petitions
at this stage. Accordingly, both writ petitions shall remain
pending before this Court for monitoring compliance and
issuing such further directions as may be necessary.
39. List these matters after seven months for consideration of the
compliance reports and further directions.


…………………………………………..J.
[VIKRAM NATH]



…………………………………………..J.
[APARESH KUMAR SINGH]


NEW DELHI;
NOVEMBER 02, 2026
WP(C)NO.511/2022 ETC. 17