Snail-paced Fast Track Courts

Justice delayed is justice denied. The objective behind establishment of Fast Track Courts (FTC) is to ensure speedy trial of cases of heinous crimes against women and children, senior citizens, disabled people. Piling up of cases in FTCs has resulted in long delays in trial of many cases defeating the very purpose for which those were set up. Demand for constitution of FTCs is rising with alarming rise in case of heinous nature in the country. The Central Government has informed the Parliament that the establishment of FTCs lies within the domain of the State Governments which set up such courts in accordance with their need and resources, in consultation with the respective High Courts. The Parliament was also informed about the recommendation of the 14th Finance Commission for setting up of 1800 FTCs during 2015-2020 for speedy trial of specific cases of heinous nature, civil cases related to women, children, senior citizen, disabled persons, persons infected with terminal ailments etc. and property-related cases pending for more than five years. Against the target set by the FC, altogether 907 FTCs were set up till 2020 and till May, 823 FTCs are functional. Latest official data reveals a bleak picture of 15.78 lakh cases pending before these FTCs in May. In Assam, 16 functional FTCs have so far disposed 717 cases while number of pending cases has soared to 11,518. One can imagine how fast the pending cases will be disposed if number of functional FTC does not increase. Uttar Pradesh has the highest number of 12.21 lakh cases pending before 372 functional FTCs in the state. Rising cases before FTCs speak volume not only about alarming increase in crimes of heinous nature but also about the deficiencies in the criminal justice system of the country and fast erosion of public trust in it. Lack of scientific investigation, inadequacy in forensic investigation due to dearth of modern laboratories equipped with adequate number of state-of-the-art equipment, trained and skilled professionals have compounded the problem of shortage of judges in the country leading to piling up of cases in regular courts. Against the requirement of 50 judges per 10 lakh population, the current strength is 21 judges per 10 lakh population based on 2011 population of 121 crores. Actual strength of judges is less if the current population is considered which is projected to have increased to 139 crores. The clamour for more fast track trial is growing in different states with the alarming rise in gruesome incidents of rape of women and sexual violence against children. For expeditious trial and disposal of case related to rape and Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO), 1023 Fast Track Special Courts (FTSC), including 389 POCSO courts, have been set up under the centrally sponsored scheme of the Department of Justice under the Ministry of Law and Justice. The scheme started in October 2019 for one year period and was further extended till March 31 this year with total allocation of RS 1572 crore, the central government share being Rs 971 crore. As on May 31, altogether 758 FTSCs, including 412 exclusive POCSO Courts, are functional in 29 States and union territories which together have disposed of more than 1,69,000 cases while 1,95,797 cases are pending. Among these, exclusive POCSO Courts have disposed of more than 1,08,000 cases while more than 1,30,000 cases are pending till May 31, according information furnished by the central government in the Lok Sabha. These figures present the hard realities of speed and trial of cases in FTCs and FTSCs but general public are not aware of the larger picture when they press and hope for speedy trial in an FTC. The government, however, while agreeing to the demand and giving assurance for fast track trial is aware of the ground realities of cumulative pendency before the FTCs. According to an official release issued by the Press Information Bureau, a study on “Evaluation of Functioning of Fast Track Courts in India” conducted by National Law University, Delhi brought to light that the establishment of FTCs was not accompanied by special infrastructure, special administration, and separate cadre of staff or relaxation of the procedure. Therefore, their working is no different from regular courts and they face the same structural difficulties as regular courts. The lack of adequate support has caused overburdening of the FTCs. Some of the key recommendations made in the study include appointment of more experienced Judges in the FTCs, need for specific recommendations of the National Court Management System which are applicable to FTC, and Judges fixing case-specific time frames for deciding cases in FTCs as suggested by the 245th report of Law Commission of India. The Central and state governments provide adequate financial and logistic support to FTCs has become an urgent necessity.