Justice delayed: Fast-track special courts still aren't fast enough

Fast-track special courts (FTSCs) were established to speed up trials in rape and child sexual-abuse cases. Yet, these very courts, meant to accelerate justice, are themselves moving at a slow pace, according to the data recently presented in the Lok Sabha by Union Law and Justice Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal. The numbers for Delhi are especially troubling: The place currently has 16 FTSCs, and of the 6,278 cases instituted since inception, only 2,718 were disposed of by June this year. Cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act take, on average, over 1,700 days (nearly five years) to conclude. This is far too long for providing justice to victims of such abuse. However, this mirrors a broader judicial system across India: The backlog in courts has reached staggering levels. The India Justice Report 2025 found that the pending cases in high courts and subordinate courts had crossed 50 million by the end of 2024 — a 30 per cent rise since 2020. Some high-court matters have lingered for over 30 years. The result is a system that risks denying justice not only to the many but also to those it promised to prioritise.

 

It is now clear that simply creating more FTSCs will not solve the problem. Many existing courts struggle with severe staffing shortages, procedural inefficiencies, and inadequate infrastructure. Forensic laboratories, critical to evidence in sexual-offence trials, remain chronically underfunded and overburdened, causing delays that often stretch for months or even years. Digital infrastructure, a potential game-changer for efficiency, remains patchy. In some courts, stable internet connectivity is a challenge; secure, integrated digital evidence systems are far from universal. Reforms in India’s judicial system are long overdue. They must be structural and procedural. Staffing gaps must be filled urgently, with transparent recruitment and capacity-building for the judicial and non-judicial personnel. Forensic capacity should be expanded through more regional labs and strict turnaround timelines. A robust digital backbone is essential for universal, secure case access, online filing, and virtual hearings. One of the reasons for inadequate capacity is low state expenditure on the judiciary. According to estimates, India’s expenditure on this as a percentage of gross domestic product is about half that of European countries. 

 

Procedural discipline is equally necessary: Strict limits on adjournments in time-bound cases, district-specific backlog-reduction plans supervised by senior judges, and standard operating procedures across institutions to expedite legal processes. For victims of sexual assault, prolonged delays are not just administrative failures; they are emotional and psychological burdens. As the Delhi High Court’s Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma rightly observed last year, each moment spent waiting for justice deepens trauma and delays healing. Fast-track courts were designed to symbolise urgency, efficiency, and compassion. Unless bottlenecks are tackled in parallel, “fast-tracking” will remain an illusion, and the promise of swift justice for all categories of gender-based violence will remain unfulfilled.