HC pushes for setting up 138 fast-track POCSO courts

HC directs collaboration to establish 138 fast-track POCSO courts in Maharashtra, highlighting need for infrastructure and support staff in lower judiciary.

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court (HC) on Monday directed its administrative department and the state government’s law and judiciary department to collaborate and determine the requirements to establish 138 fast-track courts designated under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act in the state. The registry and the government department were also asked to zero in on locations within six weeks’ time where these courts can be set up.

A POCSO court awarded the Ludhiana resident 20 years of rigourous imprisonment for sexually assaulting his minor daughter. (HT File)

For context, fast-track courts are specialised establishments with the primary aim of expediting the trial process for cases related to sexual offences, particularly those involving rape and violations of the POCSO Act.

Although the state has designated POCSO courts, there is a dearth of fast-track establishments to speed up trials.

The division bench of justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Manjusha Deshpande was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Vaijnath Pandurang Vaze, for increasing strength of judges in the Maharashtra lower judiciary and adequate court infrastructure for district and magistrate courts.

On Monday, government pleader PP Kakade informed the court that although both the central and state governments have sanctioned adequate funds for establishing additional POCSO courts, the state has been unable to do so as the HC administration should determine suitable locations for these courts. Subsequently, he proposed that a meeting be held by both parties to decide on the practicalities. According to Kakade, out of the 138 fast-track POCSO courts to be established, 38 are to be funded by the state government, while the remaining 100 are to be funded by the Union government. He said the state government has allocated ₹47.25 crore for the 38 courts and the centre has allocated over ₹100 crore for the remaining 100 fast-track courts. However, due to the pending requirement from the HC administration, the state has been unable to proceed with setting up the courts.

The bench agreed that it may not be possible to move ahead with the plan without necessary assistance from the court administration. The court also took the opportunity to point out the critical infrastructural issues faced by lower courts. It expressed how necessary infrastructure should be established before increasing the number of courts so that the system doesn’t suffer. It expressed how besides courtrooms, every court requires basic infrastructure such as auditoriums, bar rooms, and other infrastructure necessary for its functioning.

The court also expressed how besides increasing the strength of judges in the lower judiciary, it’s also necessary to recruit the necessary support staff.

“What’s the point of establishing all these courts if there is no support staff”, the court remarked. “When you create posts, the staff has to follow. How do you expect them to dispose of cases without the required supporting staff?”, the court asked.

It recollected an instance wherein someone from one of the lower courts had complained about how two judges there had to share a stenographer. The court further directed the state to seek information from every district, labour, industrial, and family court about the requirements of support staff and other infrastructure.

The court will now deliberate on the matter in June.