In a significant expression of concern, the Supreme Court of India today highlighted the acute shortage of judges in the District Judiciary, emphasizing that this deficit is hampering the functioning of Special Courts designed for handling cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The court pointed out that the existing vacancies are causing prolonged delays in trials, which undermines efforts to expedite justice in sensitive cases involving children.
During the proceedings, a bench comprising Justices Bela M. Trivedi and PB Varale observed that despite the establishment of Special Courts to streamline POCSO cases, the objective is far from being achieved due to an insufficient number of judges. The lack of judicial officers not only burdens the courts but also makes it challenging to adhere to the Supreme Court’s directives aimed at speeding up trials.
The issue was brought to the forefront in suo moto proceedings initiated to address systematic issues plaguing the implementation of the POCSO Act. Senior Advocate VV Giri, serving as the court-appointed amicus curiae, suggested that an updated compliance report should be sought from states to assess the effectiveness of measures like the establishment of special POCSO courts, appointment of Special Prosecutors, and training for relevant personnel.
Justice Trivedi voiced frustration over the persisting vacancies, stating, “We don’t have judges. Where do we get the judges? Whose fault? All Courts are overburdened, we don’t get judges. All vacancies are remaining.” She highlighted that in Gujarat alone, a minimal fraction of the judicial posts have been filled, reflecting a broader national issue that impedes the judiciary’s capacity to function efficiently.
The discussion also touched upon the challenges of compliance with court orders. Justice Trivedi noted that despite the formation of special courts, the sheer volume of cases and the scarcity of judges lead to a situation where even well-intentioned directives cannot be fully implemented.
The Court also debated the utility of directing High Courts to report on the pendency of POCSO cases, with Justice Trivedi expressing skepticism about the effectiveness of such data collection in the absence of adequate judicial staffing.
The hearing concluded with the Court deciding to adjourn the matter to March 25, signaling that further discussion and potentially decisive actions might be expected at that time. The justices hinted at a possible conclusion of the matter during the next hearing but refrained from issuing new directives to the High Courts, acknowledging the limitations imposed by the current judicial infrastructure.
