E-Paper
SC slams delay in setting up NIA courts
The Supreme Court criticized the Centre for not establishing exclusive NIA courts, urging budget allocations to ensure timely trials and prevent bail for serious offenders.
The Supreme Court on Thursday told the Centre that its continued failure to establish exclusive courts to try cases investigated by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) was emboldening hardened criminals to “hijack” the system by delaying trial.
Hearing a bail plea filed by an alleged Maoist sympathiser, the top court urged the Centre to make liberal budgetary allocations with a view to ensuring that a positive message goes to the people regarding a timebound trial.
A bench of justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi said, “If you (Centre) can have timebound trials, particularly in heinous cases, it will send a very good message to the society as hardened criminals think they can hijack the entire system. They will not allow trial to be concluded for another 10 years and courts will be compelled to grant them bail.”
The court’s observations came after an affidavit was filed by Centre indicating that talks are on with 11 states to establish dedicated special courts for trial of NIA cases. This followed an order of the top court on July 18 warning the Centre and states that failure on their part to have dedicated special NIA courts will leave the court with no option but to grant bail to prisoners languishing in jail for heinous offences registered under the NIA Act.
Additional solicitor general (ASG) Aishwarya Bhati appearing for the Centre said, “We are in good talks with Delhi and Kerala on establishing dedicated NIA courts. In Kerala, it will be established to exclusively deal with cases related to the Popular Front of India.” The PFI has been declared an “unlawful association” under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967 (UAPA).
The court said, “You first make a commitment that you will make budgetary allocation. Leave the rest to us to convince the high courts.”
The ASG informed the court that while the budgetary allocations have been roughly worked out, the same have not been approved by the finance ministry. According to her, the setting up of special courts will entail a non-recurring expense of ₹1 crore and a recurring expenditure of ₹60 lakh.
The bench said, “You need to be a little liberal in this aspect. ₹60 lakh will not be enough. This is an opportunity for you to incentivise. Judicial infrastructure, whatever is there, you need to create one more room, provide a judge and secretarial staff. Instead of ₹60 lakh, it may be ₹1 crore.”
ASG told the court that the proposal will also entail an equal contribution from the states as well. The court agreed to examine this aspect on the next date while urging the Centre to provide a matching grant.
The court had observed in July, “If the authorities fail to establish special courts with requisite infrastructure to conduct timebound trials, the courts would invariably be without any option but to release undertrials on bail.” The court had further noted that the issue was crucial as it involved liberty of undertrials who remain behind bars in the absence of any mechanism to promise them a speedy trial.
The observations of the court came while considering the bail plea of Kailash Ramchandani, an alleged Maoist sympathiser from Maharashtra’s Gadchiroli district, booked under the UAPA by the NIA.
The court had on an earlier occasion on May 23 highlighted the alarming backlog of trials under special statutes such as UAPA, MCOCA, and the Explosives Act and underscored the absence of a judicial audit and coordinated executive planning.
