NEW DELHI: Gujarat, Rajasthan, Kerala and Karnataka are among 10 states that have ignored pleas to set up fast-track courts to deal with heinous crimes, especially those against women, children and the elderly, according to information from the Ministry of Law and Justice.
Among other states in the list where not one of the special courts have been set up are Punjab, Madhya Pradesh, Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Mizoram.
This is despite the funds that have been earmarked to set up such courts in each of these states. There are also other states, like Delhi, that have far fewer fast-track courts than they should have had.
The upshot is that the concept of quick justice — or ‘justice delayed is justice denied’ — is being consigned to the bin.
The states were urged to set up fast-track courts to reduce the burden on higher courts where a huge number of cases have been pending for years. Data from the ministry shows India has only 722 of the 1,800 proposed courts.
A comparison of the crime graphs in the states and the number of fast-track courts in them shows an even more disappointing trend. For instance, Delhi, which tops the list of crimes against women has only 14 fast track courts. It should have had at least 63. Delhi accounts for the maximum number of rape cases among 19 major cities at 40% and nearly 29% of cases of alleged cruelty by husbands and their relatives or dowry deaths. In 2016, Delhi accounted for 2,155 cases of rape, 669 cases of stalking and 41 cases of voyeurism.
The 14th finance commission had noted that the Centre had proposed setting up 1,800 fast track courts at a cost of `4,144 crore to conduct trials of cases of women, children and the elderly. It urged state governments to use the additional funds to meet the requirements. In 2003 and in 2008, the Law Commission of India had proposed setting up permanent fast-track courts.
In 2011, the Centre had decided to stop the funding for fast-track courts. But in 2012 on a direction from the Supreme Court, it revised the policy. The court also endorsed the Centre’s position that it was within the powers of the states to set up and run the courts.