The Supreme Court on Monday emphasised the urgent need for exclusive special courts to deal with cases under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS), highlighting concerns over prolonged trials and undertrial incarceration.
A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi noted that delays in such cases raise serious concerns under Article 21, observing that while allegations may be grave, “there are questions of liberty… these issues do arise before us.”
The Court noted that several accused persons remain in custody for years due to slow trials. It stressed that the absence of dedicated courts leads to fragmentation, where courts handle multiple categories of cases simultaneously, slowing down proceedings.
Push For Exclusive Courts & Infrastructure
The Court underlined that special courts must function exclusively, noting: “These courts are right now occupied with other matters also… how to ensure that they are able to take up only exclusive cases?….Once a sessions trial would commence, it would continue on a day-to-day basis unless concluded.”
The bench also highlighted logistical concerns, stating that such courts should ideally be located within the same judicial complex to ensure accessibility for lawyers.
Funding Model: ₹1 Crore + ₹1 Crore
Referring to the Union Government’s scheme, the Court noted that:
• ₹1 crore would be provided as non-recurring expenditure (with states bearing land/building costs)
• ₹1 crore would be recurring expenditure per court, including staff support
“One plus one crore for each court shall be provided,” the Court clarified. The Court further suggested centre that “If your funding scheme addresses UAPA… it can have a beneficial impact irrespective of whether NIA or the State prosecutes.”
Need For Dedicated Judges & Prosecutors
The Court stressed the importance of appointing experienced judicial officers and dedicated public prosecutors:
“We are using the word exclusively… the presiding officer is also a human being, how much work can we expect?”
It also noted that performance evaluation mechanisms may need to be revisited to account for the complexity of such trials.
Data Sought From States
Taking note of variations across states, the Court directed Advocates General to furnish detailed data on:
• Number of pending UAPA and NDPS cases
• Number of undertrials
• Requirement of exclusive courts
The Court observed: “We need to determine how many exclusive courts are required… states may be facing very different case loads.”
_________________________________________
The matter has been listed for further hearing on May 11, 2026, with the Court requesting the presence of all State’s Advocate Generals to assist in finalising the framework.