In a stern warning to the Centre and Maharashtra government, the Supreme Court on Friday pulled them up for their failure to establish dedicated special courts under the National Investigation Agency (NIA) Act and other special laws. The court cautioned that this lapse could force it to grant bail to accused persons due to the lack of timely trials.
A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi observed, “If the authority fails to establish courts with requisite infrastructure for conducting speedy trials under the NIA Act and other special statutes, the court would invariably be forced to release the accused on bail.”
The rebuke came during the hearing of a bail plea by Kailash Ramchandani, an alleged Naxal sympathiser from Maharashtra’s Gadchiroli district, accused in a 2019 IED blast that killed 15 state police personnel. The apex court had earlier denied him bail on March 17 due to trial delays but on Friday recalled that order, stating that his plea would be reconsidered if the government fails to set up the required special court before the next hearing.
The Centre and Maharashtra were given a final opportunity to comply, with the court stating, “Last opportunity is granted to the Centre and the state government to take decision as per the observations made by the court,” and listed the matter for hearing after four weeks.
Additional Solicitor General Rajkumar Bhaskar Thakre, appearing for the government, submitted that a court in Mumbai had already been designated for NIA cases with the high court’s approval. However, the bench was unimpressed, noting that simply relabeling existing courts amounted to “coercing” the High Court and violated the spirit of the Supreme Court’s directions.
“We are satisfied that no effective or visible steps have been taken to set up special courts… Contrary to our orders, an impression has been created that designating an existing court is sufficient compliance,” the bench said, warning of possible strictures if the situation persists.
The bench also expressed broader concerns about judicial infrastructure, noting that assigning special cases to already overburdened courts would come “at the cost of undertrials and prisoners from marginalized sections who are languishing in jails.”
Extending its criticism to the functioning of tribunals, the court flagged the government’s practice of outsourcing clerical staff to handle sensitive records. “Can you imagine service provider employees managing records of cases worth thousands of crores? If anything happens, who will be responsible?” the court asked, expressing serious concerns about accountability.
Earlier in May, the court had emphasized the need for dedicated NIA courts and called for a “judicial audit” of laws passed by the Centre and states to assess whether sufficient judicial infrastructure had been created to support their implementation.
The court has repeatedly stressed that delayed trials in heinous offences allow accused persons to benefit from bail, undermining the justice delivery system. In Ramchandani’s case, the court noted that charges had not even been framed despite his being in custody since 2019, while several co-accused had already been granted bail.
