"Most Vulnerable To Exploitation": Supreme Court Urges Centre To Bring Legal Framework For Protection Of Rights Of Domestic Workers

The Apex Court passed such a direction while considering the appeals arising from a First Information Report containing allegations of wrongful confinement and trafficking of a female domestic worker-complainant.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan said, “It will be appreciated if the Committee submits a Report within a period of 6 months, whereupon the Government of India may consider the necessity of introducing a legal framework which may effectively address the cause and concern of domestic workers.”

Factual Background

The Complainant, a resident of Chhattisgarh, belonging to a financially disadvantaged family from a Scheduled Tribe was brought to Delhi in 2009 by her neighbours under the pretext of securing work. Upon her arrival, she was handed over to one Shambhu who claimed to run the Saint Maryam Placement Services (Regd.). He forcibly deployed the Complainant as a domestic help/housekeeper in various households. The Complainant further alleged that he failed to compensate her for the labour extracted and instead misappropriated her earnings and she was routinely assaulted.

Ajay Malik recruited the Complainant having purportedly entered into a written agreement with the Placement Agency, for her to work as a domestic help at his official residence in Dehradun, Uttarakhand. Malik departed from his residence with his entire family, for official duty and left the complainant behind with a phone so that she could remain in touch. It was then that the complainant contacted the Police Authorities to register a complaint of wrongful confinement. An FIR was lodged against four individuals—Ajay Malik, Mohan Ram, Subhash, and Shambhu—under Sections 343 and 370 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).

The Special Leave Petition before the Apex Court was preferred by the accused Ajay Malik against the judgment of the Uttarakhand High Court whereby the Application seeking the compounding and quashing of the criminal proceedings initiated against him, was rejected. Another Petition was filed by the State challenging the judgment whereby the co-accused Ashok Kumar’s Revision Application seeking discharge was allowed by the High Court.

Reasoning

The Bench noticed that the mobile phone allegedly left by Ajay Malik with the Complainant, and subsequently recovered by the police, raised questions about the plausibility of wrongful confinement. The existence of a temporary pass issued by the DRDO Colony bolstered Malik's claim that the Complainant frequently left the residence and the colony for errands. Reference was also made to the no-objection affidavit submitted by the Complainant which elucidated that the Complainant had no grievances against Malik and she unequivocally asserted that she was neither trafficked nor wrongfully confined by him.

Discarding the conspiracy charges against Malik, the Bench observed that the Investigating Agency failed to establish any prima facie case. Since the FIR had been investigated and a Chargesheet had been filed, the FIR alone couldn’t serve as the basis for dismissing his claim. Notably, no element of illegal confinement, trafficking, or criminal conspiracy had been established against Malik.

The Bench also upheld the order of the High Court allowing the discharge of Ashok Kumar from the criminal proceedings as there was no direct allegation against him made by the Complainant herself. Neither the FIR nor the Complainant's statements disclosed any explicit, illegal act on Kumar's part. As per the Bench, Kumar was not named in the original FIR and was only added by way of a Supplementary Chargesheet by the Investigating Officer, seemingly as an after-thought. The Bench thus allowed Ajay Malik’s appeal and dismissed the appeal filed by the State.

One of the main issues dealt by the Bench was about the rights, protections, and privileges (or lack thereof) accorded to domestic workers in the Indian milieu. “While any avenues for employment being opened to marginalised women merit celebration, we are at pains to note that despite their growing demand, this indispensable workforce has also been the most vulnerable to exploitation and abuse”, it said.

Emphasizing the fact as to how in the international spectrum, over the course of many decades, the ILO has provided various guidelines and conventions for the betterment of labour laws across the world, the Bench stated, “It, thus, seems to us that no effective legislative or executive action in furtherance of enacting a statute, which could prove to be a boon to millions of vulnerable domestic workers across the country, has been undertaken as of now.”

“It is in this vein, that we once again repose our faith in the Legislature, and the elected representatives of the Indian people, to take the imperative steps towards ensuring an equitable and dignified life for domestic workers”, the Bench said. Highlighting the need to address the lack of protection & systemic neglect faced by this workforce, the Bench directed, “As regard to the larger issue of the protection of rights of domestic workers, we direct the Ministry of Labour and Employment in tandem with the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, the Ministry of Women and Child Development, and the Ministry of Law and Justice, to jointly constitute a Committee comprising subject experts to consider the desirability of recommending a legal framework for the benefit, protection and regulation of the rights of domestic worker.”

Cause Title: Ajay Malik v. State of Uttarakhand and Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 118)

Click here to read/download Judgement