THE IMPACT OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC FACTORS ON CHILD LABOUR IN INDIA: A LEGAL AND CRIMINOLOGICAL STUDY

Author: Ishika Sumbria and Jasdeep Kaur (Asst. Prof.)

1. INTRODUCTION

1.  Background of the Study

Child labour is one of the most pressing social and economic concerns of the modern world. Despite international conventions and national legislations, it continues to exist in both developed and developing nations, albeit with different dimensions. Globally, according to the International Labour Organization (ILO), around 160 million children are engaged in child labour, and nearly half of them are involved in hazardous occupations that directly threaten their health, education, and future development. The persistence of this problem reveals that child labour is not merely a legal violation but a structural issue rooted in poverty, inequality, and social neglect.

In the Indian context, the problem of child labour has deep historical and socio-economic roots. India, with its vast informal sector, has one of the largest numbers of child labourers in the world. Children are found working in agriculture, brick kilns, carpet weaving, domestic service, small industries, street vending, and even in hazardous sectors like fireworks and bidi-making. Despite constitutional guarantees and numerous legislations such as the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, amended in 2016, child labour continues to thrive due to persistent poverty, unemployment of adults, lack of education, and weak enforcement mechanisms.

India has also ratified international conventions such as the ILO Convention No. 138 (Minimum Age) and ILO Convention No. 182 (Worst Forms of Child Labour), and is a signatory to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). Yet, the challenge lies not only in the existence of laws but in their proper enforcement and in addressing the socio- economic conditions that compel families to push their children into labour.

1.  Statement of the Research Problem

1.  Importance of Treating Child Labour as a Socio-Economic Offence

Traditionally, child labour has been treated as a labour law or human rights issue. However, in reality, it qualifies as a socio-economic offence because it arises not just from individual exploitation but from larger social and economic structures. Employers often take advantage of children’s vulnerability, and families, driven by poverty, accept child labour as a survival strategy.

Child labour, therefore, has features of socio-economic offences:

• It is directly linked to poverty, unemployment, and inequality.

• It involves systemic and organized exploitation in industries and supply chains.

• It perpetuates cycles of illiteracy and poverty, affecting economic growth and social development.
• It often constitutes a white-collar crime, where employers exploit cheap labour for profit.

By treating child labour as a socio-economic offence, policymakers and courts can shift focus from merely punishing employers to addressing root causes through poverty alleviation, education, and rehabilitation.

1. Research Gap

Although child labour has been widely studied, existing research focuses mainly on constitutional and statutory provisions while neglecting the socio-economic factors—poverty, unemployment, and migration—that perpetuate it. Weak enforcement is acknowledged but rarely analyzed in terms of corruption, resource shortages, or political pressures. Comparative perspectives with developed and developing countries are also limited, and little attention is given to loopholes in Indian law, particularly the 2016 amendment permitting child work in family enterprises. Moreover, the long-term impact of judicial decisions and the need for

1. Research Questions
   1. What are the major socio-economic factors contributing to child labour in India?
   1. How effective is the existing legal framework in preventing and regulating child labour?
   1. What role does the judiciary and non-governmental organizations play in combating child labour?
   1. Can child labour be eradicated without addressing the socio-economic realities of poverty and unemployment?
   1. Objectives of the Study
      1. To analyze child labour in India as a socio-economic offence.
      1. To study the impact of poverty, unemployment, migration, and illiteracy on child exploitation.
      1. To evaluate the constitutional, statutory, and international legal framework on child labour.
      1. To examine judicial responses and enforcement challenges.
      1. To suggest reforms for effective prevention, protection, and rehabilitation of child labourers.
   1.  Hypothesis

Child labour in India persists primarily due to socio-economic deprivation, and unless legal enforcement is supported by poverty alleviation and education reforms, the problem cannot be eradicated.

1. Methodology

This research adopts a doctrinal methodology, focusing on constitutional provisions, statutory frameworks, case laws, and international conventions relating to child labour. It further examines judicial pronouncements to understand the approach of the Indian judiciary.

1. Primary sources include statutes such as the Child Labour Act, Juvenile Justice Act, Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, and the Right to Education Act, along with constitutional provisions.

1. Scope:

• The study primarily focuses on child labour in India and its link with socio- economic factors.
  • It examines the Indian legal framework along with international conventions and judicial responses.
  • It highlights both legal and criminological aspects, aiming to provide policy recommendations.
  • Limitations:
    • Due to resource constraints, the study relies largely on secondary data and doctrinal analysis.
    • Primary empirical fieldwork (direct surveys) may not be possible.
    • The focus is confined mainly to child labour and does not cover other child-related offences such as trafficking and child marriage in detail, except where they intersect with labour exploitation.
• SOCIO-ECONOMIC DIMENSIONS OF CHILD LABOUR

Child labour is not merely a violation of statutory provisions but a manifestation of deep-rooted socio-economic problems. It reflects structural poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, social inequalities, and lack of state support. Children become the most vulnerable group, easily exploited by industries, middlemen, and even families struggling for survival. This chapter examines the socio-economic dimensions of child labour in India, supported by judicial interpretations.

• Poverty and Economic Deprivation

Poverty remains the most significant factor leading to child labour. Families with inadequate income are compelled to send their children to work in order to supplement household earnings.

Case Law:

• M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu¹– The Supreme Court recognized that poverty compels parents to send children to work in match and fireworks factories. It directed the State to ensure free education and rehabilitation for such children.
  • Unemployment and Underemployment of Adults

High levels of unemployment and underemployment force children into the labour market as cheaper alternatives to adult workers. Employers prefer children as they can be paid less and are less likely to demand rights.

Case Law:

• People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India² (Asiad Workers’ Case) – The Court held that employment of children in construction work was a clear violation of Article 24 of the Constitution and emphasized that economic compulsions cannot justify exploitation of children.
  • Illiteracy and Lack of Education

Illiteracy among parents and lack of access to quality education for children aggravates child labour. Many families fail to recognize the long-term value of education and prefer immediate income. Even though the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 mandates schooling till 14 years, poor infrastructure and lack of awareness hinder its implementation.

Case Law:

• Unnikrishnan J.P. v. State of Andhra Pradesh³– The Supreme Court held that the right to education is a fundamental right under Article 21, laying the foundation for Article 21A (Right to Education). This decision recognized education as the strongest tool to combat child labour.

¹ (1996) 6 SCC 756

² (1982) 3 SCC 235

³ (1993) 1 SCC 645

Seasonal migration and displacement due to natural disasters, development projects, or poverty push children into exploitative labour conditions. Migrant children are often employed in brick kilns, construction sites, and roadside work without regulation or protection.

Case Law:

• Bachpan Bachao Andolan v. Union of India⁴– The Supreme Court acknowledged trafficking and forced labour of children, especially among migrants, and directed authorities to strictly enforce laws to protect vulnerable children.
  • Organized Exploitation and Informal Sector

A significant portion of child labour is hidden within the informal economy. Children are employed in hazardous industries such as carpet weaving, glass and bangle factories, mining, and fireworks, as well as in domestic service. These sectors often operate outside the regulatory framework, making detection and enforcement difficult.

Case Law:

• Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India⁵– The Court treated bonded labour, including child bonded labour, as a violation of fundamental rights under Articles 21 and 23. It recognized the role of poverty and socio-economic structures in perpetuating forced and exploitative labour.
  • Gender and Social Inequality

Girls are disproportionately affected by child labour, often engaged in domestic work, sibling care, or exploitative informal jobs. Caste and class hierarchies also influence the prevalence of child labour, with marginalized communities being more vulnerable.

Observation: Judicial pronouncements like M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu⁶ have repeatedly emphasized the responsibility of the State to ensure that marginalized children are not doubly exploited due to their socio-economic status.

⁴ (2010) 7 SCC 615

⁵ (1984) 3 SCC 161

⁶ (1996) 6 SCC 756

From a criminological viewpoint, child labour is a form of structural crime where children are victims of systemic poverty and exploitation. Employers who profit from child labour engage in what is essentially a white-collar socio-economic offence, exploiting children’s vulnerabilities for economic gain. Victimology highlights that children lack the agency to resist or protest against such exploitation, making legal intervention crucial.

The socio-economic dimensions of child labour reveal that it is not an isolated offence but a by-product of poverty, illiteracy, unemployment, and organized exploitation. Courts in India have recognized these realities and consistently stressed the need for a multi-pronged approach combining legal enforcement with socio-economic reforms. Unless the root causes are addressed, legal prohibitions alone will remain ineffective in eliminating child labour.

• LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN INDIA

India has adopted a multi-layered legal framework to combat child labour, combining constitutional guarantees, statutory provisions, and judicial interpretations. While these laws aim to protect children from exploitation, their effectiveness often depends on the socio- economic realities of the nation. This chapter discusses the constitutional framework, statutory legislations, and judicial precedents related to child labour in India.

• Constitutional Provisions

The framers of the Indian Constitution recognized the importance of protecting children from exploitation. Several provisions are directly aimed at eliminating child labour:

• Article 21A – Provides the right to free and compulsory education to all children between the ages of 6 to 14.
  • Case: Unnikrishnan J.P. v. State of Andhra Pradesh⁷– The Court held that the right to education is implicit in Article 21, which led to the incorporation of Article 21A by the 86th Constitutional Amendment, 2002.
  • Article 23 – Prohibits trafficking in human beings, begar (forced labour), and other similar forms of forced labour.

⁷ (1993) 1 SCC 645

• Statutory Provisions

• Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 (Amended 2016)

• Original Act (1986): Prohibited employment of children below 14 in certain hazardous occupations and regulated conditions in others.
  • 2016 Amendment:

• Complete prohibition of employment of children below 14 in all occupations (except helping in family businesses and entertainment industry under non- hazardous conditions).
  • Adolescents (14–18 years) prohibited from hazardous work.

• Stricter penalties: Employers can face imprisonment from 6 months to 2 years and fines up to ₹50,000.
  • Criticism: Loophole allowing children to help in “family enterprises” often leads to disguised exploitation.

⁸ (1982) 3 SCC 235

⁹ (1996) 6 SCC 756

• M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu¹⁰– Court directed strict implementation of the Child Labour Act and ordered creation of a Child Labour Rehabilitation Welfare Fund, funded by employers who violated the law.
  • Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015

• Provides for care, protection, development, and rehabilitation of children in need, including those engaged in labour.
  • Section 79: Punishes exploitation of children for labour with imprisonment up to 5 years and fine up to ₹1 lakh.
  • Recognizes child labour as an offence against children’s dignity and development.

• Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976

• Abolishes bonded labour, which often traps children due to intergenerational debts.

• Declares bonded labour agreements void and imposes penalties on employers.

Case:

• Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India¹¹– The Court held that bonded labour violates Articles 21 and 23 and directed state governments to take active measures to identify and rehabilitate bonded labourers, including children.
  • Factories Act, 1948 and Mines Act, 1952

• Prohibit employment of children below 14 in factories and mines.

• Adolescents (14–18 years) can work only under strict health and safety conditions.

• Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act)

• Provides free and compulsory education to children aged 6–14.

• Makes education a fundamental right, complementing efforts to eradicate child labour by keeping children in schools.

¹⁰ (1996) 6 SCC 756

¹¹ (1984) 3 SCC 161

The Indian judiciary has played a proactive role in interpreting laws against child labour in the context of fundamental rights.

1. Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India¹² – Recognized bonded child labour as a violation of fundamental rights and emphasized rehabilitation.
2. M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu¹³ – Directed creation of a welfare fund for education and rehabilitation of child workers.
3. Bachpan Bachao Andolan v. Union of India¹⁴ – Held that trafficking and forced labour of children are grave violations of child rights and directed stricter implementation of existing laws.
4. Salal Hydro Project v. State of J&K¹⁵ – Supreme Court condemned employment of children in construction projects and emphasized strict adherence to constitutional mandates.

The legal framework in India reflects a strong constitutional and statutory commitment towards eradicating child labour. Judicial interventions have expanded the scope of child rights and emphasized rehabilitation along with prohibition. However, the gap between law on paper and law in practice persists due to weak enforcement, corruption, and socio-economic pressures. Thus, while the framework is comprehensive, its implementation remains the biggest challenge in addressing child labour as a socio-economic offence.

• INTERNATIONAL FRAMEWORK AND COMPARATIVE STUDY

Child labour is not only a national issue but also a global human rights concern. The international community, through treaties, conventions, and guidelines, has consistently emphasized the need to protect children from economic exploitation. This chapter discusses the international legal framework governing child labour and provides a comparative analysis with selected jurisdictions to evaluate India’s position in the global context.

¹² (1984) 3 SCC 161

¹³ (1996) 6 SCC 756

¹⁴ (2010) 7 SCC 615

¹⁵ (1984) 3 SCC 538

• United Nations Instruments

• Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), 1948

• Article 25 recognizes the right to security and an adequate standard of living.

• Article 26 provides for the right to education.

• Establishes a moral foundation for child protection worldwide.

• United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), 1989

• India ratified in 1992.

• Article 32: Protects children from economic exploitation and hazardous work.

• Article 28: Recognizes the right to education.

• States must implement legislative, administrative, and social measures for child protection.
  • Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), 2015

• Goal 8.7: Calls for immediate and effective measures to eradicate forced labour, end modern slavery and human trafficking, and secure the prohibition of child labour by 2025.
  • International Labour Organization (ILO) Conventions

• ILO Convention No. 138 (Minimum Age Convention, 1973)

• Fixes minimum age for employment: not less than the age of completing compulsory schooling (generally 14 or 15 years).
  • India ratified in 2017.

• ILO Convention No. 182 (Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999)

• Calls for immediate elimination of worst forms of child labour, including slavery, trafficking, prostitution, and hazardous work.
  • Ratified by India in 2017.

• ILO Recommendation No. 146 (1973)

• India

• Prohibits child labour through Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2016, but with exceptions (family enterprises).
  • Education guaranteed under RTE Act, 2009.

• Enforcement is weak, and socio-economic pressures keep children in labour.

• United States

• Governed by the Fair Labor Standards Act, 1938 (FLSA).

• Sets minimum age (14 years for non-agricultural work).

• Restricts working hours and prohibits hazardous occupations for minors under 18.

• Strong enforcement through the Department of Labor.

• Child labour mostly eliminated; violations rare and harshly punished.

• United Kingdom

• Governed by the Children and Young Persons Act, 1933 and subsequent regulations.

• Minimum working age is 13, with restrictions on hours and types of work.

• Education is compulsory until age 18, which indirectly reduces child labour.

• Strong social welfare system ensures minimal economic compulsion for child labour.

• Bangladesh (for regional comparison)

• Labour Act, 2006 sets minimum age at 14, but allows light work from age 12.

• Despite legal provisions, child labour remains widespread in garments and informal sectors.
  • Socio-economic challenges and poor enforcement mirror India’s struggles.

• Strengths:

• India has ratified core ILO conventions (138 & 182).

• Strong constitutional and statutory framework.

• Active judiciary and civil society movements.

• Weaknesses:

• Loopholes in legislation (e.g., “family enterprises” exception).

• Weak enforcement mechanisms.

• High prevalence in informal sectors (agriculture, domestic work, small industries).
• Comparative Insight:

• Unlike the US and UK, where strict enforcement and strong welfare systems have eradicated child labour, India continues to face challenges similar to Bangladesh due to poverty, illiteracy, and cultural acceptance of child work.

The international framework sets high standards for the elimination of child labour, emphasizing education, rehabilitation, and protection against exploitation. While India has made significant progress by aligning its laws with ILO conventions and UNCRC obligations, the implementation gap remains a critical challenge. Comparative analysis shows that effective enforcement, coupled with socio-economic development, is the key to success in eliminating child labour.

• FINDINGS, ANALYSIS, AND SUGGESTIONS

This chapter consolidates the key findings of the study, critically analyses the effectiveness of existing laws on child labour, and provides suggestions for reform. The objective is to highlight the gap between law on paper and law in practice and propose strategies to treat child labour as a socio-economic offence.

• From Global Perspective

• Despite international commitments under ILO Conventions 138 & 182 and the UNCRC, child labour remains a global problem, concentrated in developing nations.
  • Developed countries like the US and UK have nearly eliminated child labour due to strict enforcement, compulsory education, and robust social security systems.
  • Developing countries, including India and Bangladesh, continue to struggle due to poverty, illiteracy, and weak implementation mechanisms.
  • From Indian Perspective

• Prevalence: India still has millions of child labourers, particularly in informal sectors like agriculture, domestic work, and small-scale industries.
  • Loopholes in Legislation: The 2016 Amendment to the Child Labour Act permits children to work in family enterprises, which often leads to disguised exploitation.
  • Weak Enforcement: Despite constitutional guarantees under Articles 21A, 23, and 24, implementation is hindered by corruption, lack of manpower, and poor monitoring.
  • Judicial Activism: Courts (e.g., M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu¹⁶, Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India¹⁷) have been instrumental in expanding child rights and directing rehabilitation, but their orders are not uniformly enforced.
  • Socio-Economic Causes: Poverty, lack of access to quality education, and cultural acceptance of child labour continue to push children into the workforce.
  • Analysis

• Child labour as a socio-economic offence: Unlike conventional crimes, child labour arises from socio-economic inequalities rather than criminal intent alone. Employers exploit economic vulnerability, making it both a labour and human rights issue.

¹⁶ (1996) 6 SCC 756

¹⁷ (1984) 3 SCC 161

• Rehabilitation over Punishment: Merely punishing employers without rehabilitating the child workers results in displacement rather than protection. A comprehensive rehabilitation mechanism is crucial.
• Gap between Law and Reality: While India’s legal framework aligns with international standards, weak enforcement and poverty-driven compulsion make child labour persist.
  • Suggestions

• Legislative Reforms

• Remove Loopholes: The “family enterprise” exception in the Child Labour Act should be narrowed or removed.
  • Uniform Minimum Age: Harmonize all labour laws to ensure 18 as the minimum age for hazardous and exploitative work, in line with ILO standards.
  • Stricter Penalties: Increase fines and imprisonment for repeat offenders and corporations engaging in child labour through supply chains.
  • Strengthening Enforcement

• Establish special child labour courts/benches for speedy trial of offences.

• Train labour inspectors to conduct surprise inspections, especially in informal sectors.

• Introduce digital tracking systems for monitoring rescued children to prevent re- trafficking.
  • Socio-Economic Measures

• Expand mid-day meal schemes and conditional cash transfers to incentivize education.

• Create skill development programs for parents to break the intergenerational cycle of poverty.
  • Strengthen the Integrated Child Protection Scheme (ICPS) for rehabilitation of rescued children.

• Encourage public interest litigations (PILs) to keep the issue alive in judicial discourse.

• NGOs like Bachpan Bachao Andolan should be provided more state support for rescue operations and rehabilitation.
  • Awareness campaigns to change societal attitudes that normalize child labour.

Child labour in India is not merely a legal violation but a socio-economic offence rooted in poverty, illiteracy, and structural inequalities. While India has developed a robust legal framework aligned with international standards, the real challenge lies in effective enforcement and socio-economic reforms. A multi-pronged strategy combining legislative reforms, strong enforcement, social welfare measures, and awareness campaigns is essential to eradicate child labour. Unless law is supported by poverty alleviation and education reforms, the cycle of exploitation will continue.

• RECOMMENDATIONS

• Legal Reforms

• Eliminate Loopholes: Remove or strictly regulate the “family enterprise” exemption in the Child Labour Act.
• Harmonize Age Standards: Align all child-related labour laws to prohibit hazardous and exploitative work below 18 years, in line with ILO conventions.
• Corporate Accountability: Mandate supply chain audits to hold corporations responsible for child labour in subcontracted industries.
  • Strengthening Enforcement

• Establish special child labour courts/benches for speedy disposal of cases.

• Empower labour inspectors with real-time digital reporting systems and accountability mechanisms.
• Ensure stricter penalties, including blacklisting of businesses found employing children.

• Expand conditional cash transfer schemes to families that send children to school.

• Strengthen mid-day meal programs, scholarships, and free textbooks/uniforms to reduce the economic burden of schooling.
• Launch skill development and employment schemes for parents to reduce reliance on child income.
  • Rehabilitation and Social Awareness

• Strengthen the Integrated Child Protection Scheme (ICPS) for long-term rehabilitation of rescued children.
• Encourage collaboration with NGOs like Bachpan Bachao Andolan for rescue operations and child rehabilitation.
• Launch awareness campaigns to change societal attitudes that normalize child labour, especially in rural and informal sectors.

Child labour is not simply a violation of law but a violation of human dignity and childhood itself. It reflects the socio-economic inequalities within society, where poverty and illiteracy push children into labour, and employers exploit this vulnerability for economic gain. India’s progress in aligning with international standards is commendable, but the path to complete eradication requires collective responsibility—from the state, judiciary, civil society, and citizens.

The ultimate solution lies in a holistic approach: stronger laws, strict enforcement, socio- economic support to families, rehabilitation of victims, and societal change. Only then can India fulfill its constitutional promise of protecting children and ensure that childhood is spent in schools, not in sweatshops.

• CONCLUSION

Child labour continues to be one of the most pressing socio-economic offences in India and globally. Despite constitutional safeguards, statutory protections, and international commitments, millions of children remain trapped in exploitative labour, often in hazardous conditions.

From the Indian perspective, the Constitution (Articles 21A, 23, and 24), along with statutes like the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 (amended 2016), the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, and the Right to Education Act, 2009, create a robust legal framework. Judicial activism in cases like M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu¹⁸ and Bandhua Mukti Morcha

v. Union of India¹⁹ has reinforced the state’s responsibility to protect children.

However, the implementation gap remains the biggest challenge. Loopholes such as the “family enterprise” exception, lack of monitoring, and socio-economic compulsions dilute the effectiveness of these laws. Unless child labour is treated not only as a legal wrong but also as a socio-economic offence, eradication will remain a distant goal.

¹⁸ (1996) 6 SCC 756

¹⁹ (1984) 3 SCC 161