The menace of abuse in shelter homes and special schools
Just last week, a disturbing headline in The Indian Express jolted readers across the country: “Two autistic brothers ‘sexually abused’ by staffer at special school in Dehradun.” The story recounts the trauma of two young boys, neurodivergent, vulnerable, and entrusted to a school meant to care for them, who were allegedly raped and physically assaulted by a 29-year-old staffer. The boys’ mother discovered the abuse during a routine visit, after which she lodged a complaint with the police. A case has been registered under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. In addition, the social welfare department has launched an inquiry into the special school.
In yet another grim instance, a 14-year-old rape survivor allegedly died by suicide at a government-aided shelter home in Chhattisgarh’s Jashpur district, NDTV reported on March 19, 2025. The girl had filed a complaint against a local boy for raping her the previous year. She was found hanging in the shelter’s washroom just days after the FIR was lodged. With no mother and a mentally ill father, she had been placed in the home for counselling and legal support. The police are investigating the case after registering a case of unnatural death.
People in general are happy to have these special schools and shelters opening across the country but the only thing lacking in most of these institutions is the follow-up accountability, a regular third-party independent audit. There is a tendency to view shelters and care homes as acts of charity, serving as a safety net for the poor and the vulnerable. These optics, or vision, need to be mended in society. Protection is not a favour; it is a constitutional right. Article 39(e) of the Constitution mandates that children and women be protected from abuse and exploitation. When the state licenses an institution to care for the vulnerable, it bears the ultimate responsibility for what happens within those walls.
In the absence of accountability and amid repeated systemic failures across states and over the years, these institutions like shelters, childcare institutions (CCIs), destitute homes, and even special schools, have begun to evoke disturbing imagery. For the common person, these institutions are a symbol of safety, a safe place for the vulnerable; however, some of the institutions have proven otherwise. They are increasingly perceived as dangerous places, marked by neglect and abuse, rather than protection and care.
The Dehradun incident is not an aberration; it is part of a grim continuum. From the Muzaffarpur shelter home case in Bihar, where at least 34 girls were raped over years, to countless unreported assaults in underfunded, unsupervised facilities, India’s institutional care system for the vulnerable needs fixing.
Official figures offer only a partial glimpse. According to data presented by the Union Minister in Parliament, a few years ago, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) received 77 complaints of child sexual abuse in shelter homes between 2018 and 2023. The numbers peaked in 2018–19 with 26 complaints, followed by 21 in 2021–22. Uttar Pradesh and Bihar recorded the highest number of reported cases. These figures likely understate the scale of abuse due to underreporting, stigma, and institutional cover-ups. Beyond the numbers, the NCPCR’s nationwide audit a couple of years ago paints a chilling picture. Of approximately 9,500 child care institutions surveyed, 40% lacked basic measures to prevent abuse, including background checks for staff and grievance redress mechanisms. Worse, nearly a third were found to be unregistered, escaping even the minimum regulatory scrutiny mandated under the Juvenile Justice Act.
It is not just children who are unsafe. Women in destitute homes, the elderly in night shelters, and homeless persons placed in state-run facilities are also at risk. Yet, no comprehensive public data exists on the incidence of abuse in these homes, despite sporadic reports in regional and national newspapers detailing beatings, starvation, and sexual violence by in-house staff.
Many questions about why such institutions, often funded and licensed by the state, are failing to provide even basic safety. The answer lies in a combination of societal neglect, official indifference and regulatory laxity. Many of these facilities operate in legal grey zones. In some cases, private operators with no credible track record receive licenses from local authorities. Staff are hired without police verification or psychological evaluation. Inspections of these institutions are rare and often perfunctory. Audits are delayed. Survivors’ voices are ignored or disbelieved.
In the Dehradun case, the school was relatively new and reportedly had trained tutors. Yet, it was a visiting parent, not a supervisor or a grievance redress system, who detected the abuse. In other words, there was no internal mechanism robust enough to detect or prevent predatory behaviour from staff. If parents had not visited or the children had not spoken up, the case might have remained buried. The lack of trained caregivers who understand and can communicate with neurodivergent children adds another layer of vulnerability. In many cases, abuse goes undetected simply because the child cannot express what is happening, or is disbelieved due to their condition. In response to public outrage, when some of these cases appear in the media, authorities often rush to suspend licenses or promise “strict action.” However, these episodes are rarely treated as symptoms of a broader issue.
For instance, following the Muzaffarpur scandal, the Bihar government promised sweeping reforms and stricter vetting of NGOs. Yet, within months, another shelter home in Patna was found to have beaten children. Some states have rolled out mobile inspection apps (like the NCPCR’s inspection tool), and portals like GHAR have been launched to track children in institutional care. But tech solutions alone cannot compensate for the lack of human oversight, trained personnel, and empathetic governance. Meanwhile, conviction rates in these cases remain equally low. Survivors face long-drawn trials, hostile institutions, and poor access to trauma-informed support. Staffers often go unpunished due to lack of evidence, as many facilities either lack CCTV systems or tamper with footage.
What Needs to Change: A Six-Point Plan for Accountability
Our country cannot afford to treat each incident as a one-off tragedy. To prevent systemic abuse in shelters and special institutions, urgent structural reforms and professionalism are required.
The first and foremost is that awareness programmes through multiple media outlets and campaigns need to showcase to the masses that there are some government schemes, laws and punishments, but what is needed is a vigilant neighbourhood and their support so that society gets involved rather than neglecting them. Inmates of these shelter homes are always scared of losing their place or job and hence hesitate to even speak against the caretakers or wrongdoing.
All child care institutions, night shelters, women’s homes, and special schools must not only have compulsory registration from central and state welfare departments, but also have a regular method for submitting a quarterly report of their staff performance, training, inmates’ behaviour, etc, that needs to be reported. Repeated regulatory purview is mandatory.
All personnel, including teachers, wardens, and security guards, must undergo a three-tier background check, psychological assessments, and mandatory sensitivity training, particularly when working with children, women, and individuals with disability. Their social media footprint needs to be rigorously checked and monitored.
Third-party audits by child rights and human rights commissions, not just by local officials, should be conducted at least twice a year. Surprise inspections by the task force must be institutionalised, and audit reports should be made public.
Every facility must have an independent grievance redress officer available to residents in their local language and accessible through confidential complaint boxes or helplines. The state ombudsman for institutional care must be empowered to take suo motu action.
Cases of abuse in state-licensed shelters must attract criminal liability not only for the perpetrator but also for their immediate supervisors, institutional heads, if neglect is proven. Chain of command should be held accountable for any neglect. Fast-track and special courts for special people should prioritise such cases and ensure timely justice for survivors.
The two brothers in Dehradun, like hundreds before them, trusted that the school their mother chose would help them learn and grow. Instead, they were betrayed, physically and emotionally. If we do not act now, with reforms, not just rhetoric, more such lives will be shattered behind locked doors. The first step toward healing is accountability. The second is vigilance. And the third is compassion, not in words, but in action.
Surinder Singh Oberoi,
National Editor Greater Kashmir
