"Supreme Court affirms constitutional rights of consenting adult sex workers"
Article 142
Supreme Court power to pass any order necessary to do complete justice in pending matters.
Article 23
Constitutional prohibition on traffic in human beings and forced labour (Right against Exploitation).
India's legal framework on trafficking and sex work has long been governed by the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (ITPA), which criminalises brothel-keeping and soliciting but does not explicitly criminalise sex work itself. In practice, however, enforcement has blurred this distinction — police raids, forced rescues, and detention in 'corrective homes' or government shelter homes have been routine, often targeting sex workers rather than traffickers. The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) and the Trafficking in Persons (Prevention, Care and Rehabilitation) Bill (in various draft forms) have further shaped the policy landscape, though critics argue these instruments conflate voluntary adult sex work with trafficking.
The constitutional basis for sex workers' rights rests primarily on Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty, including dignity and bodily autonomy), Article 14 (equality before law), and Article 19 (freedom of occupation). The Supreme Court has, over the years, expanded Article 21 to encompass the right to livelihood, the right to dignity, and protection from arbitrary state action. Article 142, which empowers the Supreme Court to pass any order necessary to do complete justice, has been invoked in socially sensitive matters where legislative gaps exist — a power the court deployed in this judgment to give its directions binding legal force.
The judgment of May 29, 2026 represents the most comprehensive rights-based judicial intervention on sex work in India's constitutional history, spanning nearly 300 pages and departing from the paternalistic assumptions that have dominated both law and policy for decades.
The Supreme Court's judgment makes several conceptually significant departures from conventional anti-trafficking discourse. First, it recognises that agency and vulnerability can coexist — a person may be economically marginalised and still exercise meaningful consent. This dismantles the binary that has long driven policy: the assumption that all sex workers are victims incapable of autonomous choice. Second, the court explicitly rejects the conflation of migration with trafficking — a critical distinction, since migrant sex workers have historically been the most vulnerable to wrongful detention under the guise of rescue.
Third, and most consequentially for enforcement, the court holds that consenting adult sex workers cannot be forcibly rescued and that any intervention must begin with an inquiry into consent. This shifts the legal default from presumed victimhood to presumed agency, requiring the state to establish absence of consent before intervening. …
Which of the following are envisaged by the Right against Exploitation in the Constitution of India?
1.Prohibition of traffic in human beings and forced labour
2.Abolition of untouchability
3.Protection of the interests of minorities
4.Prohibition of employment of children in factories and mines
Select the correct answer using the code given below:
Under which of the following Articles of the Constitution of India, has the Supreme Court of India placed the Right to Privacy?
With reference to the Supreme Court's directions on sex work, consider the following statements:
1.The court held that consenting adult sex workers cannot be forcibly rescued without prior inquiry into consent.
2.The court invoked Article 21 to give its directions immediate binding legal force.
3.The court recognised caste as a structural condition that can push women into sex work.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Which Article of the Indian Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to pass any decree or order necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it?
Consider the following statements regarding India's legal framework on trafficking and sex work:
1.The Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 explicitly criminalises the act of sex work itself.
2.The Palermo Protocol defines trafficking as requiring an element of coercion, deception, or abuse of power.
3.The Supreme Court's consent-first approach in its 2026 directions aligns with the Palermo Protocol's definition of trafficking.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Assertion (A): The Supreme Court's directions on sex work, issued under Article 142, have the same binding legal force as a statutory provision enacted by Parliament.
Reason (R): Article 142 empowers the Supreme Court to pass any order necessary to do complete justice, and such orders operate notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force.
Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above?
Want the full note, Prelims Facts & MCQ answers?
Create a free account — takes less than a minute.
Create free account