SC asks Centre to form policy to set up Spl courts for terror cases

THe sublime margaret court on fri directed the unification and tell governments to formulate a comprehensive policy for establishing exclusive courts to try cases under special statutes, including the National Investigation Agency (NIA) Act, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), and other stringent laws, emphasising that the fundamental right to speedy trial cannot be compromised by systemic delays.A bench of justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, hearing two separate matters arising from the Delhi High Court, rejected the practice of merely designating existing courts to handle such sensitive cases.“We do not think that designating the existing courts as NIA courts can expedite the trial proceedings because cases under the special acts will only add to the existing docket of those courts,” the bench observed.The court emphasised that the NIA Act itself empowers the Union government to establish special courts independently and suggested that retired judges of “stellar reputation and credibility” could be engaged to staff such additional courts.“Our worry is not just about the number of NIA courts but the fact that these are not dealing with NIA matters exclusively,” the bench stated.Additional solicitor general Aishwarya Bhati, appearing in one of the cases, suggested a “collaborative exercise” involving the Centre and states would be preferable. Both ASGs Bhati and SD Sanjay assured the court that a high-level joint meeting would be held involving secretaries, agency heads, and law officers to prepare a proposal.The court directed that chief secretaries and home secretaries of states also participate and sought the outcome by October 14.“Both the ASGs state that a joint meeting at the highest level will be conducted and a proposal for establishment of exclusive courts to conduct expeditious trials under the special statutes will be held. Such meeting will be attended by secretaries of the concerned departments, heads of investigation agencies involved and the ASGs. It will be appropriate if state governments, through their chief secretaries and home secretaries, are also associated in the decision-making process and they attend the meeting. The outcome be placed before the court on the next date,” the bench ordered.Building on earlier warningsFriday’s directions build upon the bench’s stern warning in July, when it cautioned authorities that continued failure to establish exclusive courts under special statutes may compel the judiciary to grant bail to undertrial prisoners, even in cases involving terrorism and heinous crimes.“If the authorities fail to establish special courts with requisite infrastructure to conduct time-bound trials, the courts would invariably be without any option but to release undertrials on bail... How long can such suspects be kept behind bars when there is no mechanism for speedy trial?” the bench had remarked while hearing a bail plea by an alleged Naxal sympathiser booked under UAPA.The court had flatly rejected the Centre’s earlier proposal to designate existing trial courts for NIA cases, pointing out that such courts were already burdened with routine matters, from civil suits to matrimonial disputes.“You cannot have the same court dealing with NIA cases, matrimonial matters, and civil suits,” it had said, stressing that only exclusive courts with dedicated judges and staff could ensure day-to-day trial of sensitive cases involving hundreds of witnesses.The bench’s insistence stems from alarming figures submitted by Delhi Police earlier this year in another case. Out of 288 gang-related trials pending in the capital, charges had been framed in only 108, while 180 were still awaiting charge-framing. The affidavit candidly admitted a delay of three to four years between framing of charges and commencement of prosecution evidence.The police had also highlighted security and logistical concerns, urging the creation of dedicated court complexes within jail premises to avoid unsafe prisoner transport and prevent the glamourisation of gangsters through social media reels.While acknowledging these concerns, the Supreme Court made clear that only a holistic, coordinated approach involving the Union, states, and high courts could provide a durable solution.“Keeping in view the pendency... There will have to be an appropriate strength of courts to ensure that these cases can be equitably distributed and then trials can be taken on a day-to-day basis,” it said in July.The court emphasised that failure to act would continue to undermine Article 21 rights of undertrials and weaken the justice system in sensitive matters.