The BRICS TimesThe apex court reprimanded the government for not creating exclusive NIA courts, stressing the need for sufficient funds to ensure speedy trials and curb misuse of bail provisions by hardened offenders.
The Supreme Court on Thursday strongly criticized the Union government for its persistent failure to establish exclusive courts to hear matters probed by the National Investigation Agency (NIA). The top court cautioned that this delay was allowing hardened offenders to “hijack” the judicial process by dragging trials endlessly.
The remarks came during the hearing of a bail petition filed by an alleged Maoist supporter. The bench, comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, emphasized that the Centre must prioritize adequate budgetary provisions to ensure that trials are completed within a fixed time frame, thereby sending a positive message to society at large.
The bench observed, “If you (Centre) can have timebound trials, particularly in heinous cases, it will send a very good message to the society as hardened criminals think they can hijack the entire system. They will not allow trial to be concluded for another 10 years and courts will be compelled to grant them bail.”
The criticism followed an affidavit submitted by the Centre, which disclosed that discussions were ongoing with 11 states for setting up specialized courts for NIA cases. This development comes after the court’s July 18 order cautioning both the Centre and state governments that without dedicated NIA courts, judges would have no alternative but to release undertrial prisoners accused of grave offences under the NIA Act.
Representing the government, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aishwarya Bhati told the court, “We are in good talks with Delhi and Kerala on establishing dedicated NIA courts. In Kerala, it will be established to exclusively deal with cases related to the Popular Front of India.” The PFI has already been declared an “unlawful association” under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), 1967.
Responding to this, the bench insisted, “You first make a commitment that you will make budgetary allocation. Leave the rest to us to convince the high courts.”
The ASG informed the judges that while preliminary estimates had been made, the proposal was awaiting clearance from the finance ministry. She explained that creating these courts would require a non-recurring expenditure of ₹1 crore and an annual recurring cost of around ₹60 lakh.
The bench, however, expressed dissatisfaction, remarking, “You need to be a little liberal in this aspect. ₹60 lakh will not be enough. This is an opportunity for you to incentivise. Judicial infrastructure, whatever is there, you need to create one more room, provide a judge and secretarial staff. Instead of ₹60 lakh, it may be ₹1 crore.”
It was also conveyed to the court that the states would need to share an equal financial responsibility in establishing these courts. The bench stated it would consider this aspect during the next hearing but urged the Centre to commit to providing matching grants.
The Supreme Court had earlier in July warned, “If the authorities fail to establish special courts with requisite infrastructure to conduct timebound trials, the courts would invariably be without any option but to release undertrials on bail.” The judges had stressed that the issue directly affected the liberty of those languishing in jails without any assurance of a speedy trial.
Thursday’s hearing was linked to the bail plea of Kailash Ramchandani, a resident of Gadchiroli in Maharashtra and an alleged Maoist sympathiser, who was arrested under the UAPA by the NIA. The case once again highlighted the judiciary’s concerns about delays.
The court had earlier, on May 23, pointed out the worrying pendency of cases under special laws such as the UAPA, the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA), and the Explosives Act. It had also raised the need for judicial audits and better coordination between the judiciary and the executive to prevent systemic delays in such sensitive matters.
