GS 2: PolityGS 2: GovernanceGS 2: Social JusticePrelims
Fast-track courts: When they can be established, where they lag, Pg13
PM Modi's call for fast-track courts for paper leaks sparks debate on their efficacy, constitutional limits, and persistent pendency despite higher disposal rates.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi's promise to establish Fast-Track Courts (FTCs) for paper leak cases has drawn attention to their role in addressing judicial delays.
There is no single central legislation governing the establishment and functioning of FTCs in India.
The 14th Finance Commission recommended FTCs to expedite trials for heinous crimes and cases involving vulnerable demographics like women and children.
In 2019, a Centrally Sponsored Scheme launched Fast-Track Special Courts (FTSCs) exclusively for rape and Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act cases, partially funded by the Nirbhaya Fund.
As of January, 862 regular FTCs and 774 FTSCs (including 398 exclusive POCSO courts) were operational across 21 states and 29 states/UTs respectively.
Detailed Insights:
The creation of special courts must satisfy Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law.
In State of West Bengal vs Anwar Ali Sarkar (1952), the Supreme Court ruled that "speed" alone is too vague a criterion for establishing special courts.
Cases chosen for special courts must have a rational, objective basis, such as the nature of the offense or the vulnerability of the victims.
The Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita recommends that trials should ideally be completed within two years, with sexual offense trials within two months.
Each FTSC is expected to dispose of 41-42 cases per quarter, or at least 165 cases annually, with an average disposal rate of 9.5 cases per month.
Despite a high disposal rate of around 96% for special courts, over 2.4 lakh cases were still pending in FTSCs by the end of 2023.
The Ministry of Law and Justice attributes delays to factors including infrastructure availability, case complexity, investigation quality, and stakeholder cooperation.
The Supreme Court's P. Rama Chandra Rao v. State of Karnataka (2002) ruling stated that it is neither advisable nor judicially permissible to prescribe an outer limit for concluding criminal proceedings.
Key Concepts Involved:
Fast-Track Courts (FTCs): Specialized courts established to ensure speedy disposal of specific categories of cases, often with a time-bound mandate.
Centrally Sponsored Scheme: A scheme where the central government provides financial assistance to state governments for implementing specific programs.
Nirbhaya Fund: A non-lapsable corpus fund established by the Government of India for schemes aimed at enhancing the safety and security of women.
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act: A comprehensive law enacted in 2012 to protect children from sexual assault, sexual harassment, and pornography.
Article 14: A fundamental right in the Indian Constitution that guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws to all persons within India.