Courts will have to release NIA, UAPA accused if special courts not setup: SC to Centre

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Centre and Maharashtra government for not creating courts for cases under special statutes concerned that courts will be forced to grant bail to accused.

The order of a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi said, "If the authority fails to establish courts with requisite infrastructure for conducting speedy trial under the NIA Act and other special statutes, the court would invariably be forced to release the accused on bail, as there is no effective mechanism to conclude the trial in time bound manner."

The bench told Additional Solicitor General Rajkumar Bhaskar Thakre, appearing for the Centre and Maharashtra government, designating the existing courts as special courts amounted to “coercing” the high court to relabel them.

"We are satisfied that no effective or visible steps have been taken to set up special courts for speedy trial in cases under NIA Act and other special statutes. It goes without saying that setting up of special courts would require creation of posts for superior judicial officers, staff, courtroom and basic amenities," the bench said.

The bench said contrary to its orders, an impression was created that designation of existing court as special court under the NIA Act would be sufficient compliance of the directives.

"We are outrightly rejecting this plea taken by the respondents (Centre and the Maharashtra government," the bench said, proposing if the high court chief justice had agreed to it, the court would call for an explanation.

The bench said designating courts as special courts or entrusting exclusive trial under the NIA Act and other special statutes to the existing courts would be at the cost of undertrials and prisoners of old age, marginalised sections of society, languishing in jails.

The top court passed the order on the bail plea of Kailash Ramchandani, a Naxal sympathiser from Gadchiroli in Maharashtra, who was booked after 15 policemen of a quick response team of state police were killed in an IED blast in 2019.

The top court recalled its earlier order of March 17 which rejected his bail plea filed on the ground of inordinate delay in conclusion of trial and said if the Centre and the state government failed to establish special court for trial of the NIA cases, his plea for relief should be considered on the next hearing.

"Last opportunity is granted to the Centre and the state government to take decision as per the observations made by the court," the bench said and posted the matter after four weeks.

Thakre earlier submitted that a special court was designated in Mumbai for NIA cases with the high court's approval.

The statement irked the bench, which questioned the ASG about cases the judge was already hearing when the court was designated as special NIA court.

"Why should it be done at the cost of other litigants? If you are bringing new statutes, you need to create adequate infrastructure and sanction posts in superior judicial services," the bench said.

The top court asked not for "commitment" but "action from the government".

The bench flagged the situation in tribunals where outsourced employees were employed by the government to man records "worth thousand of crores".

"Can you imagine these staff employed by service providers keeping the record of cases worth thousands of crores of rupees. If anything happens, who will be responsible? Will there be any accountability?" the bench asked.

The court noted it was restraining itself from passing adverse orders but "if forced" it would pass strictures and document the situation in tribunals as well.

On May 23, the top court underlined the need for dedicated courts for NIA cases while calling for a "judicial audit" of laws enacted by the Centre and the prospective ones by the states.

It said the cases entrusted to the NIA were heinous cases, having pan India ramifications and each such case contained hundreds of witnesses and the trial did not progress with the required pace as the presiding officers of the court were busy with other cases.

On May 9, the top court said it was imperative on the Centre and states to establish courts for the speedy trial of cases under special laws and sought to know their stand on the issue.

The top court had previously noted that due to delay in completion of trial, those accused in heinous offences took advantage of bail as trials couldn't go on indefinitely. Ramchandani has challenged the Bombay High Court order rejecting bail plea on March 5, 2024.

He contended he had been in jail since 2019 and while charges hadn't been framed in the case so far, the co-accused had been granted bail.