By Dr Swati Jindal Garg
John Walsh, creator and former host of America’s Most Wanted, once said: “One missing child is one too many.” In India, that statement resonates not as a warning, but as a grim daily reality.
The crisis of missing children in India is not merely a matter of numbers. It is a human tragedy rooted in fractured governance, institutional apathy, and prolonged suffering endured by families who wait—sometimes for decades—without answers. The Supreme Court has once again forced the nation to confront this uncomfortable truth through its observations in G Ganesh vs State of Tamil Nadu.
At the heart of the case is a child who went missing in 2011, at just one year and ten months of age. More than a decade later, the family remains suspended between hope and despair, while the state machinery has only recently shown signs of movement. The Supreme Court’s rebuke—that the State had “finally woken up from its slumber”—is not merely a judicial reprimand. It is an indictment of a system that repeatedly fails its most vulnerable citizens.
A bench, comprising Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and R Mahadevan, noted the alarming lack of seriousness with which missing children cases are handled. Their concern echoes a harsh, but undeniable truth: India’s governance structures have consistently failed to prioritize the safety and recovery of children.
This is far from an isolated failure. Over the years, the Supreme Court has been inundated with petitions involving missing children, organized trafficking networks, and unresolved cases stagnating on platforms such as KhoyaPaya.
In parallel, another Supreme Court bench, led by Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice R Mahadevan continues to hear Guria Swayam Sevi Sansthan vs Union of India, a PIL that lays bare the scale of child trafficking and the staggering backlog of untraced children across the country.
While the judiciary’s proactive stance is commendable, it also raises an uncomfortable question: Why must the highest court repeatedly intervene in matters that should be routine responsibilities of state governments and law enforcement agencies?
CHILD PROTECTION: A CONSTITUTIONAL MANDATE
The Constitution leaves no room for ambiguity. Article 21’s guarantee of life and personal liberty has been interpreted to include dignity, safety, and protection from exploitation. Articles 39(e) and (f) mandate that children be safeguarded from abuse and allowed to grow in conditions of freedom and dignity. Article 15(3) empowers the State to enact special protections for children, while Article 24 prohibits their exploitation through hazardous labour.
Read together, these provisions impose both a moral and legal obligation on the state to prevent child disappearance, trafficking, and exploitation. Yet, reality tells a different story. Thousands of children go missing each year. Many are trafficked into forced labour, sexual exploitation, illegal adoption, or worse. The absence of a uniform, binding Standard Operating Procedure across States has resulted in fragmented responses, delayed investigations, and irreversible harm.
THE G GANESH CASE: A SYMBOL OF SYSTEMIC FAILURE
The facts of G. Ganesh vs State of Tamil Nadu are devastating in their simplicity. A toddler disappears. Years pass. Institutions remain unmoved. It takes judicial intervention for the state to act—and even then, belatedly.
The Court’s observations reflect how missing children cases are routinely reduced to administrative files, stripped of urgency and empathy. This case underscores the urgent need for a national framework—a common SoP that transcends state borders and ensures uniform standards of response, investigation, and rehabilitation.
THE LARGER CANVAS: TRAFFICKING AND ORGANIZED CRIME
Missing children cannot be viewed in isolation. Inter-state and intra-state trafficking networks operate with alarming efficiency, exploiting poor coordination, weak enforcement, and jurisdictional silos. The PIL filed by Guria Swayam Sevi Sansthan exposes how children are trafficked for labour, sexual exploitation, illegal adoption, and even organ trade.
Digital tools such as the KhoyaPaya portal, envisioned as solutions, now stand as grim repositories of unresolved cases—revealing not technological failure, but institutional neglect. The Supreme Court’s direction to appoint dedicated nodal officers and upload their details on the Mission Vatsalya portal is a step towards accountability, but implementation remains the true test.
WHY A COMMON SOP IS NON-NEGOTIABLE
The lack of standardized procedures has created stark disparities across states. Some have specialized units and digital systems; others rely on overburdened police stations and manual registers. A common SoP would ensure:
• Immediate registration of FIRs in all missing children cases.
• Time-bound investigations with accountability for delays.
• Robust inter-state coordination to dismantle trafficking networks.
• Integration of KhoyaPaya and Mission Vatsalya with police databases.
• Comprehensive rehabilitation, counselling, and reintegration.
• Periodic judicial and administrative monitoring.
Behind every statistic is a family trapped in limbo, navigating bureaucratic indifference while enduring deep psychological trauma. A uniform SoP would offer clarity, timelines, and accountability—restoring a measure of faith in the system.
GLOBAL LESSONS, INDIAN REALITIES
Countries such as the United States and members of the European Union have established rapid-response alert systems emphasizing speed, coordination, and public participation. India requires its own tailored model—one that accounts for its scale, diversity, and governance challenges. The Supreme Court’s initiative could become that turning point.
BEYOND THE COURTS
Civil society organizations and technology must play a complementary role. From AI-driven identification tools to improved data-sharing systems, innovation can accelerate recovery—provided it is guided by sensitivity and respect for children’s dignity and privacy.
Ultimately, judicial intervention cannot substitute executive responsibility. Without legislative backing, budgetary support, and administrative will, even the most well-crafted SoP risks becoming another paper promise.
CONCLUSION: FROM COURTROOMS TO COMMUNITIES
G Ganesh vs State of Tamil Nadu is not just a legal case—it is a mirror reflecting a national failure. The Supreme Court has opened a critical window for reform. Whether India seizes it depends on collective action.
Children are the nation’s future. Their disappearance is not merely a personal tragedy—it is a national shame. The Court has lit the torch. It is now for the nation to carry it forward.
—The author is an Advocate-on-Record practising in the Supreme Court, Delhi High Court and all district courts and tribunals in Delhi
The post One Missing Child Is One Too Many: Why India Needs a Unified National Response Now appeared first on India Legal.