How many Special Courts in One Judge?: SC calls it impractical, orders States to fix System in 4 weeks

Today, in a significant intervention aimed at speeding up trials in serious offences, the Supreme Court directed all States to submit concrete proposals within four weeks for establishing exclusive courts to handle cases under laws such as the UAPA and NIA statutes. The Court made it clear that the current system, where “special courts” exist only on paper while judges juggle multiple case categories, undermines timely justice, prompting a nationwide push for structural overhaul.

The issue came under scrutiny during ongoing monitoring of earlier directions on special courts, with several States and the Union Government participating through their Advocate Generals. The core concern was the existing practice of assigning multiple “special” jurisdictions to a single judge, including cases under the SC/ST Act, POCSO Act, and NI Act, thereby diluting focus on serious offences. The Court was also apprised of logistical gaps such as a lack of dedicated prosecutors, insufficient infrastructure, and delays caused by funding constraints under the matching grant model. States were asked to assess their case load in consultation with High Courts and propose the number of courts required, while the Centre indicated willingness to extend financial support.

The Bench observed, “The same officer will be special court under the SC/ST Act, under NI Act, under POCSO… how many special courts in one officer?” and stressed that such an arrangement is “completely impractical.” It emphasised that exclusive courts must function in the true sense, observing that “these courts will be dedicated to no other case… that officer will have only those trials.”

Emphasising the gravity of offences and limited scope for bail, the Court called for day-to-day hearings and a fixed timeline for trial completion. It further directed that experienced judicial officers be designated exclusively for such courts, supported by dedicated prosecutors, staff, and a separate performance evaluation mechanism.

Accordingly, States have been tasked with filing detailed proposals within four weeks, with the Court set to continue monitoring compliance.

Disclaimer: This news/ article includes information received via a syndicated news feed. The original rights remain with the respective publisher.