Sex trafficking more heinous than drug trafficking, why does this not reflect In punishment? Orissa HC asks

The Orissa High Court recently lamented that the offence of drug trafficking involved more stringent penalties than the trafficking of girls for sexual exploitation, despite the latter being “more heinous” (Panchanan Padhi v. State of Orissa)..The Court was dealing with a bail application by a person accused of being part of a sex trafficking racket..The Court noted that there was a "conflict between collective morality of the society and markedly skewed legislations which mismatches the culpability of the participants in question (i.e. service provider, facilitator) and the recipient of the services [of human trafficking]."."Though it involves clandestine and unlawful trafficking of girls but the law makers have missed the opportunity to prescribe a stringent punishment regime, even though the present offence is far more heinous than drug trafficking."Justice SK Panigrahi, Orissa High Court.The judge added that, "There seems to be an all-pervasive puritan, moral, anti-prostitution posture of the Government, but in practice, there is a yawning gap between the law and its enforcement which results in abysmally low conviction rates.".Justice Panigrahi recalled that in the present case information-received was recieved by the police about a trafficking-ring, following which an investigation and raid were conducted leading to the arrest of the ‘kingpin’. .The petitioner’s counsel denied any connection between the owner of the trafficking operations and the petitioner, while the prosecution vehemently argued of his involvement in the illicit operations..The Court, on its part, opined that prima facie, there appeared to be a "complete racket run by the principal accused and his accomplice though the complete picture will emerge from a thorough trial.".The judgment involves an elaborate discussion of the conventions, treaties, and laws forming the international and Indian frameworks governing sex trafficking, with the aid of pronouncements by the Supreme Court.."Unfortunately, despite the protection afforded by the Constitution, the stringent laws and large number of treaties and conventions, commercial sexual exploitation with its concomitant human rights abuse is expanding multi-fold. The human rights discourse is profoundly silent on this grave issue. Such exploitation is now not confined to conventional brothels, but is spreading everywhere including residential areas, hotels, clubs etc. as apparent in the present case", the Court noted..The Court proceeded to express concern that the kingpins behind sex rackets may intimate the victims and that the safety and security of the witness is a major issue..However, the judge was constrained to grant the petitioner bail, noting that other accused in the same case, including the owner of the trafficking ring, had already been allowed bail.."This court is, therefore, constrained to grant bail to the accused in the instant case on the grounds of parity alone.".The Court directed the grant of bail on “some stringent terms and conditions.” Before parting with the order, Justice Panigrahi also clarified that his observations should not influence the trial in the matter..Read the Judgment: