The Supreme Court has raised serious concern over the rising backlog of gangster and terror-linked cases in Delhi, urging urgent reforms and special courts for speedy trials. The Bench stressed that trials must finish within six months and said “the question of granting bail” should not arise if proceedings move on time.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday looked into the rising backlog of gangster-related criminal trials in Delhi and discussed whether special courts should be created only for these cases so that trials can finish faster.
A Bench of Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan and NK Singh said they were worried about the slow progress of serious cases that are investigated under laws such as the NIA Act, NDPS Act and UAPA.
ALSO READ: Delhi High Court Denies Bail to Gangster Neeraj Bawania in 2015 Jail Van Murder Case
During the hearing, Justice Surya Kant said that the justice system must be able to deliver quick results in such sensitive matters.
He remarked that the trials should ideally finish within six months. He stressed that
“the question of granting bail during this period should not arise at all if the trial proceeds as required.”
The Court pointed out that long delays defeat the purpose of strict criminal laws and affect both the prosecution and the accused. It said that a “committed system” is needed so that trials do not get delayed unnecessarily.
The Additional Solicitor General informed the Court that the government has already begun working on the issue and promised that the process will be sped up. The Court recorded this assurance and said that a clear decision is expected next week.
The matter will be heard again after the government gives its final view on whether special courts should be set up or if some other method can ensure quick trial of such cases.
Earlier in September, the Supreme Court had suggested that instead of pulling out cases and allocating them within the current number of judges, the Union Government should think about increasing the number of judicial officers so that these cases can be handled separately.
The Court said that taking away sitting judges and assigning them only UAPA or MCOCA cases will disturb the functioning of other courts.
The Bench was hearing two matters that highlighted the long delays and long custody periods faced by undertrial prisoners, including one case under the National Investigation Agency (NIA).
During the previous hearing, the Bench had expressed concern to Additional Solicitor Generals Aishwarya Bhati and S.D. Sanjay about the system not being able to conduct timely trials under these special laws.
Both law officers replied that they would hold a joint meeting at a senior level to discuss creating special courts for these trials. They also said that the meeting would include senior Union Government officials, heads of special forces, the Commissioner of Delhi Police, and both ASGs.
The Court recorded this assurance and directed that the meeting’s results be submitted in a status report. It also instructed the Chief Secretaries and Home Secretaries of all State governments to participate in the discussions.
During the earlier hearing, the Bench had also remarked,
“If there are 50 judges, please make it 60. That is what we are wanting…let it be on a temporary cadre,”
stressing that instead of removing judges from other courts, the government must strengthen the judicial workforce.
Justice Kant had further observed that the need for such exclusive courts may never completely disappear because new cases under these laws keep getting registered regularly.
However, if at any stage the number of such cases reduces, the judges of these courts can be moved to other types of cases.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi agreed with this view and pointed out that when it comes to NIA cases, the Central Government already has the independent power to set up special courts, unlike other laws where the power lies with State governments.
Before the matter was adjourned earlier, Justice Kant had also suggested that governments could think about appointing retired judicial officers who already have a strong record of conducting trials quickly.
He observed that “Age of 60 is hardly anything to sit at home,” explaining that many retired judges are already working in Permanent Lok Adalats and other similar bodies, so placing them in special courts would not be administratively difficult.
This issue has come up before the Supreme Court many times. In July 2025, a Bench headed by Justice Surya Kant had told the Union Government that if special courts with proper infrastructure for fast-tracking NIA cases are not created, courts may be forced to grant bail to undertrials.
The Court had then asked,
“For how long can suspects be kept in indefinite custody?”
while emphasising the importance of Article 21 of the Constitution, which protects the right to personal liberty.
Case Title:
Mahesh Khatri @ Bholi v. State NCT of Delhi
Read Order:
Read More Reports On Delhi Gangster
