The Supreme Court of India underscored that child trafficking is a disturbing social reality and laid down important guidelines on evaluating evidence of trafficking victims in K.P. Kirankumar @ Kiran v. State by Peenya Police. The Court upheld the conviction of the accused for trafficking and sexual exploitation of a minor, emphasizing that the testimony of a minor victim must be assessed with sensitivity, realism, and latitude. It held that minor inconsistencies or contradictions do not erode the credibility of a trafficking victim, especially when her account is corroborated by surrounding circumstances such as decoy operations, NGO testimony, and recovery of incriminating material. The Court clarified that a trafficking victim is not an accomplice, and her sole testimony can sustain conviction if found reliable. On age determination, it reaffirmed that school records prevail over medical or ossification tests under the Juvenile Justice framework. Addressing procedural objections, the Court ruled that non-strict compliance with search requirements under the ITPA is a curable irregularity, unless prejudice is shown. The judgment reinforces judicial responsibility to avoid secondary victimisation and to protect the dignity of child victims.