- Filed a public interest litigation in the hon’ble Supreme Court on rescue of 1.2 million minor girls from the brothels all over the country.
- Impleaded in a PIL filed against traditional prostitution like devdasi pratha in the hon’ble Supreme Court.
- Impleaded in a public interest litigation on circus children in the hon’ble Supreme Court.
- Filed public interest litigation in the hon’ble high court against illegal detention of minor rescued girls in police stations.
- Filed public interest litigation in the hon’ble high court against misuse of hon’ble high court protection orders by traffickers in cases of abduction of minor girls.
- Filed public interest litigation in the hon’ble high court for the compliance of Rule 7(4) of The Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Rules, 2012 for victim compensation.
- Filed public interest litigation in the hon’ble high court for the compliance of section 370 of the Indian Penal Code.
- Filed public interest litigation in the hon’ble high court against the misconduct of police, labour department and administration in the cases of rescue of bonded labours.
- Filed public interest litigation in the hon’ble high court for the compliance of section 154(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and section 166A of the Indian Penal Code.
- Filed a public interest litigation in the hon’ble high court for justice and compensation to a 3-year-old rape victim of Varanasi.
- Filed a public interest litigation in the hon’ble high court for compliance of Rule 12 of JJ Rules in determination of age of victims of human trafficking and sexual exploitation.
- Filed a public interest litigation in the hon’ble high court for immediate rescue and rehabilitation of minors/trafficked girls forced into prostitution in the meerganj red light area of Allahabad district.
- Filed a PIL in the hon’ble high court for proper implementation of the ICPS in UP.
- Impleaded in a public interest litigation in the Honourable High Court on better implementation of relevant law for the betterment of juvenile homes.
- Filed a public interest litigation in the Honourable High Court for the rescue of minor trafficked girls in red-light areas in the state of Uttar Pradesh.
- Filed a public interest litigation in the Honourable High Court for the formation of special courts in each district of Uttar Pradesh for the trial of cases related to human trafficking.
- Filed a public interest litigation in the Honourable High Court for facilitating safe and secure environment for survivors of sexual exploitation below the age of eighteen years
- The Hon’ble district court of Allahabad (new name Prayagraj) convicted 41 accused with 10-14 years rigorous imprisonment & total fine worth 23,14,000 INR in a case where 136 victims, belonging to the Indian states of West Bengal, Bihar, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Karnataka and also Nepal, were rescued from the brothels of Allahabad district (Meerganj red light area) in the State of Uttar Pradesh-India along with arrest of 48 accused and seizure of 61 brothels. 6 brothel keepers/traffickers died during trial and 1 is still absconding.
- Government passed an order for the creation of a medical board in each district of Uttar Pradesh for the age verification of juveniles, after the Honourable High Court’s landmark judgment on Guria India’s public interest litigation.
- Landmark Judgment by the hon’ble High Court in Public Interest Litigation filed by Guria on creation of victim compensation fund and its expeditious disbursement.
- Achieved a landmark judgement in the hon’ble Supreme Court against bail for human traffickers; previously they could walk free, often for years, and carry on tampering evidences, intimidating witnesses and targeting new victims, as their legal cases continued.
- Judgment by the Honourable High Court on the compliance of guidelines and protocols formulated by the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare for the medico-legal care of survivors/victims of sexual violence.
- Appointment of female police officers and infrastructure for recording the statements of sexual exploitation victims at each police station in Uttar Pradesh after the Honourable High Court’s judgment on Guria India’s public interest litigation.
- Two landmark judgments in the Honourable Supreme Court to reject bail for fourteen very prominent human traffickers.
- Set a precedent through the Honourable Supreme Court for rejecting fake custodies of rescued victims.
- Prevented the re-opening of sixty-one seized brothels in Allahabad through the Honourable High Court.
- Ensured the rejection of habeas corpus petitions by fake guardians in the Honourable High Court.
- Unprecedented judgment: the superintendent of a government protection home (Agra) sentenced for life imprisonment (until death) for re-trafficking fifty-seven rescued girls – the first ever sentence of life imprisonment for a protection home superintendent and first case of life imprisonment both under Section 370(7) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 16/17 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – Highlighted in US TIP Report 2019
- In spite of the rescue being executed on Guria India’s public interest litigation, the trial court denied Guria India’s locus standi that was set aside by the apex court, allowing Guria India to argue both in writing and orally.
- Judgement by the Supreme Court to retain the Allahabad Trial Court’s file with the same judge who had partly heard the final argument in the case
- Judgement by the Supreme Court for hearing a sex trafficking case of a survivor, belonging to West Bengal, on a daily basis
- The Supreme Court directed the Allahabad Trial Court to record evidence at least ten days in a month and conclude the trial expeditiously
- The High Court cancelled the bails of eight brothel keepers in the Allahabad case
- The High Court upheld the conviction of prominent brothel keepers in North India who plied their sex trade between the states of West Bengal, Maharashtra, Bihar, and Uttar Pradesh
- The High Court directed the Trial Court to summon the important witnesses in a case where the government counsel, in collusion with the accused superintendent of a government protection home, had filed an evidence closure report to the Trial Court.