Despite economic progress, rising crimes against women highlight the need for fast-track courts to ensure swift justice and deter offenders.
In recent years, India has witnessed a troubling rise in crimes against women, including rape. Despite significant economic growth, the disparity between the affluent and the underprivileged has been a persistent issue. Notably, the Gini coefficient, a measure of income inequality, has shown fluctuations over the years. According to a report by the People Research on India’s Consumer Economy (PRICE), the Gini coefficient decreased from 0.506 in 2011-12 to 0.390 in 2022-23, indicating a reduction in income inequality.
India’s economic progress and declining income inequality have not translated into enhanced safety for women, as crimes such as rape, sexual harassment, and domestic violence continue to rise. While legislative reforms and awareness campaigns have been introduced, delays in the judicial process often result in prolonged trauma for survivors and a lack of deterrence for offenders.
Official statistics reveal that in 2022, several states reported a high number of such cases, highlighting that economic growth and education alone are insufficient to curb these crimes. Social, cultural, and political factors play a significant role in perpetuating these issues.
Fast-track courts play a crucial role in addressing this issue by ensuring swift justice, reducing case backlog, and instilling public confidence in the legal system. Strengthening these courts with adequate resources and efficient procedures is imperative to effectively combat crimes against women and uphold their rights.
Disturbing Rape Statistics in India
The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) reported 30,948 rape cases in 2022, equating to one rape approximately every 17 minutes. Between 2018 and 2022, the number of reported rape cases remained alarmingly high, with slight fluctuations each year.
These figures may not capture the true extent of the problem due to under-reporting and societal stigma. Additionally, certain crimes, such as marital rape, are not recognized as offenses under current Indian law, leading to further underestimation of the issue.
Failure of the Justice System
The justice system’s inefficiencies exacerbate the plight of victims. Conviction rates for rape cases have consistently been low, ranging between 27-28% from 2018 to 2022. Factors contributing to this include inconsistent application of laws, inadequate policing, and societal pressures.
Public protests have demanded stricter laws, assuming that harsher punishments will deter offenders. However, without effective enforcement and a higher conviction rate, stricter laws alone may not suffice.
Gaps in Criminal Laws and Protection
Despite amendments to criminal laws, significant gaps remain. Marital rape is still not recognized as a criminal offense in India. Furthermore, in certain regions, armed forces personnel are protected by special laws, which can impede legal recourse for victims of sexual violence involving military personnel.
High-profile cases, such as the 2024 Kolkata doctor rape and murder, highlight the urgent need for comprehensive legal reforms and effective implementation.
Lack of Support for Rape Victims
Beyond legal challenges, there is a dire need for robust support systems for victims. The absence of adequate Rape Crisis Centres (RCCs) and Sexual Assault Treatment Units (SATUs) across most states leaves victims without essential medical and psychological support. The healthcare system often lacks the infrastructure and sensitivity required to handle such cases, leading to further trauma for victims.
Following the J.S. Verma Committee Report and the Nirbhaya case in 2013, the need for fast track courts again arose and was recognized strongly to ensure swift justice and minimize procedural delays. However, the concept of Fast Track Courts (FTCs) was first introduced in India in 2000, based on the recommendations of the 11th Finance Commission. These courts were established with the primary objective of reducing the judiciary’s massive backlog of pending cases.
Initially, they were funded for a period of five years, with a particular focus on expediting long-pending cases, especially those involving undertrial prisoners.
Shift in Perception of Fast Track Courts
By the end of the decade, fast track courts began to be seen as temporary mechanisms to manage case backlogs rather than as a permanent solution for judicial efficiency. In April 2011, the Central Government discontinued its funding for these courts, leading to their closure in most states. The fast track courts, initially established with central funding, were set up without legislative backing, leaving their purpose and procedural framework undefined.
Supreme Court Ruling on Fast Track Courts
The Central Government’s decision to withdraw funding for fast track courts was challenged before the Supreme Court in early 2012 in Brij Mohan Lal v. Union of India & Ors. The Court upheld the Union Government’s decision to discontinue financing the scheme beyond March 31, 2011. However, it issued several directives to improve the justice delivery system, including measures to expedite trials in regular courts and strengthen judicial independence.
Recognizing the constitutional obligation to ensure fair and speedy trials, the Court directed both the State and Central Governments to create additional judicial positions, amounting to 10% of the existing regular judiciary, within three months of the judgment.
State Discretion and Continuation of Fast Track Courts
Regarding the future of fast track courts, the Supreme Court ruled that states had the option to either discontinue or establish them as a permanent feature but could not continue them on an ad hoc basis. The Central Government clarified that states could maintain the fast track court scheme only if they assumed full financial responsibility. Despite the withdrawal of central funding, some fast track courts, particularly those handling sessions court cases, continued to function in states such as Karnataka.
Impact of the Nirbhaya Case and the Verma Committee Report
More than a year later, the December 2012 Nirbhaya case led to a nationwide reevaluation of the criminal justice system, particularly regarding violence against women and the difficulties survivors faced in seeking justice. As part of this introspection, a legal review was conducted under the leadership of retired Justice J.S. Verma.
The Verma Committee Report on Amendments to Criminal Law, published on January 23, 2013, underscored the need for swift justice to maintain public confidence in the legal system and to act as a deterrent against crime. The report also emphasized the importance of judicial sensitivity in handling complainants and evidence, including medical findings, and stressed the necessity of trained and sensitized judges and prosecutors.
Revival of Fast Track Courts for Sexual Assault Cases
Following the recommendations of the Verma Committee and widespread public support for faster trials, states were urged to establish fast track courts specifically for sexual assault cases. These courts were to be staffed by the additional judges appointed in accordance with the Supreme Court’s ruling in Brij Mohan Lal v. Union of India & Ors.
Over time, the scope of FTCs expanded to include cases of heinous crimes, corruption, and gender-based violence.The need for Fast Track Special Courts (FTSCs) arose after the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2018, which introduced stricter penalties, including the death penalty for rape offenses.
Public outrage following the Nirbhaya gang rape case in 2012 highlighted the inefficiencies in the justice system, prompting the establishment of dedicated courts for cases of sexual violence, particularly those involving minors under the POCSO Act, thereafter , Fast Track Special courts were introduced.
What are Fast Track Special Courts (FTSCs)?
Fast Track Special Courts (FTSCs) are dedicated courts established to accelerate the judicial process for cases involving serious sexual offenses. These include rape and offenses under the POCSO Act, which deals with crimes against minors. Given the increasing number of such crimes and the prolonged delays in standard legal proceedings, the government launched FTSCs to ensure timely justice for victims.
Centrally Sponsored Scheme
FTSCs were introduced in August 2019 as a Centrally Sponsored Scheme, under the Department of Justice, Ministry of Law & Justice. The initiative seeks to provide financial and infrastructural support to State and Union Territory (UT) governments for establishing these courts, ensuring a more effective judicial mechanism for handling sexual offense cases.
Since their inception, FTSCs have played a pivotal role in addressing sexual crime cases more efficiently. Key achievements include:
- Widespread Implementation: Thirty States and Union Territories have adopted the scheme.
- Operational FTSCs: A total of 761 Fast Track Special Courts have been established, including 414 exclusive POCSO Courts.
- Case Disposal Rate: These courts have collectively resolved over 1,95,000 cases.
- Justice in Remote Areas: FTSCs have significantly enhanced access to justice, especially in far-flung and rural regions, ensuring that victims receive timely legal recourse.
Role of Fast Track Courts in Curbing Crimes Against Women
FTSCs play a critical role in curbing crimes against women by ensuring swift and effective judicial intervention. Crimes such as rape, molestation, acid attacks, and sexual harassment require urgent legal attention to deter offenders and provide justice to survivors.
- Swift Investigation and Trial: Traditional court proceedings often take years to resolve cases, leading to delayed justice. FTSCs aim to complete trials within a set timeframe, reducing the backlog and ensuring that perpetrators are brought to justice without unnecessary delays.
- Increased Conviction Rates: Timely trials and verdicts help increase conviction rates, which acts as a deterrent against crimes like rape and sexual assault. A higher conviction rate strengthens the legal system’s credibility and prevents repeat offenses.
- Psychological Relief for Victims: Lengthy legal battles can be mentally exhausting for victims. Expedited trials ensure that survivors do not have to relive traumatic experiences over extended periods, making the judicial process more survivor-friendly.
- Reduction in Crime Due to Legal Deterrence: When criminals see that justice is swift and punishments are severe, they are less likely to commit offenses. FTSCs help establish a strong deterrent effect, reducing overall crime rates against women and children.
- Public Awareness and Sensitization: The establishment and success of FTSCs spread awareness regarding zero tolerance for sexual crimes. It also encourages more victims to report crimes, knowing that their cases will be dealt with promptly.
ALSO READ: “Crimes Against Women Unforgivable, And Offenders Must Not Be Spared”: PM Modi
Challenges Faced by Fast Track Special Courts
While FTSCs have made significant strides, certain challenges hinder their full effectiveness:
- Inadequate Infrastructure
Despite their specialized status, many FTSCs lack the necessary infrastructure and operate within the same constraints as regular courts. They are often designated from existing courtrooms rather than established as new facilities, leading to an overburdened judicial system.
- Heavy Workload and Low Case Disposal Rate
Judges in FTSCs frequently handle cases beyond sexual offenses, affecting their ability to dispose of cases efficiently. Although each FTSC was expected to resolve approximately 165 POCSO cases per year, the actual clearance rate is significantly lower, averaging only 28 cases annually per court.
- Shortage of Support Staff
For efficient functioning, FTSCs require dedicated personnel, including prosecutors, administrative staff, and forensic experts. However, many courts lack adequate staff, further slowing down proceedings and reducing efficiency.
Strengthening FTSCs for Better Impact
To ensure that FTSCs fulfill their objective of curbing crimes against women, the following steps must be taken:
- Infrastructure Development: Dedicated courtrooms with modern facilities should be established to avoid dependency on existing judicial infrastructure.
- Increase in Judge Appointments: Appointing more judges and legal personnel will help expedite case resolutions.
- Training and Sensitization: Judges, police officers, and legal staff should be trained to handle cases with empathy and efficiency.
- Strengthened Victim Support Systems: More Rape Crisis Centres (RCCs) and Sexual Assault Treatment Units (SATUs) should be established to provide psychological and medical support to survivors.
- Monitoring and Accountability: Regular assessments and reports should be mandated to evaluate the effectiveness of FTSCs and implement necessary reforms.
Fast Track Special Courts (FTSCs) are a critical legal reform in India’s fight against sexual crimes. By ensuring timely justice, enhancing conviction rates, and deterring crime, FTSCs serve as an essential mechanism to protect women and children from gender-based violence. However, challenges such as inadequate infrastructure and staffing must be addressed to strengthen their impact further. With continued government support and public awareness, FTSCs have the potential to transform India’s justice system and create a safer society for women and children.
READ MORE REPORTS ON CRIMES AGAINST WOMEN
FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE