Itanagar: The high-profile sex trafficking case in Arunachal Pradesh’s capital, Itanagar — involving minor girls and a network of accused including doctors, engineers and police personnel — has suffered a major setback as all five victims have turned hostile during trial proceedings.
As a consequence, 26 out of the 28 chargesheeted accused in the case have secured bail.
The victims, who hail from economically disadvantaged families in Assam, were trafficked to Itanagar between 2020 and 2023. Initially, they gave consistent statements to the police and magistrate shortly after the FIR was registered. However, those testimonies were later retracted in court, reportedly due to indirect influence allegedly exerted through their parents.
Officials closely tracking the case said the victims’ statements remained intact while they were in institutional care with restricted external contact. The situation, however, changed after the High Court granted visitation rights to their parents.
Although permitted to visit only on alternate days, the parents reportedly showed up almost daily, citing various pretexts. Eventually, the High Court, and later a sessions court allowed the girls to be released into custody of their parents.
“From the start, there were apprehensions that the accused — some of whom are influential — were trying to reach the victims through their parents. That seems to be exactly what happened,” a senior official told NewsFy, adding that it was unlikely the families could have pursued legal permissions up to the High Court on their own.
“When their children needed them the most and were in trauma no one came to visit them or even call them once. But suddenly they (parents) were active and even managed to hire a lawyer(s) and reach out to the High Court. Going by their financial background they were in no condition to do that,” the official said.
Questions are now also being raised about the role of the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR), which is under fire for not acting decisively to protect the victims, considering their vulnerable socio-economic status and interstate origin.
NCPCR consultant Anuj Saluja told NewsFy that the Commission had written to various authorities — including the Itanagar SP, the Arunachal Pradesh State Commission for Protection of Child Rights (APSCPCR), the Child Welfare Committee (CWC), and the Chief Secretary — recommending that the girls be relocated to Assam. However, when contacted, none of these offices confirmed receiving any such letter.
When asked for a copy of the communication, Saluja said, “I had a word with my other officials, and they asked me not to give it to you.”
In a related development, on April 4, 2025, NCPCR member Preeti Bharadwaj Dalal wrote to Chief Secretary Manish Gupta, reminding him about a comprehensive report the Commission had requested in 2024, which remains pending. The letter also sought a status update on the case. As of now, there is no confirmation of any response from the chief secretary’s office.
Responding to the developments, CWC chairperson Taba Zim told NewsFy that they had received no official directive from the NCPCR regarding relocation.
“We didn’t receive any letter about relocating the girls to Assam. They were under our care in a shelter home because statements and cross-examinations were still pending. Moving them to an Assam shelter would have made these legal processes extremely difficult,” Zim said.
“We tried our level best to prevent them from becoming hostile. But once the court granted visitation and later allowed their release, we had to comply. They are now with their parents — and yes, unfortunately, they’ve turned hostile.”
APSCPCR chairperson Ratan Anya voiced similar concerns, pointing out the parents’ sudden involvement after years of absence.
“They were missing for two years when the girls were being exploited. And suddenly, they were at the shelter gates every day. Something was definitely off,” she said.
Legal experts and child rights activists have criticised the breakdown of institutional coordination in the case.
“These are minors trafficked from another state and allegedly exploited by powerful people. If this isn’t the kind of case that deserves the NCPCR’s full attention, then what is?” asked a senior child rights activist.
Although NCPCR chairperson Priyank Kanoongo visited Arunachal Pradesh in June 2024, it remains unclear whether this case was reviewed or escalated for immediate protection measures.
With all five victims now hostile, the prosecution faces an uphill battle — raising serious questions about the state’s ability to protect vulnerable child witnesses in high-profile criminal cases. Moreover, the Capital police’s commendable effort — even going so far as to arrest high-profile accused — now seems to have been in vain.
Also read: From weapons to recruiting girls: United Tani Army’s dark trail exposed
