BRIJ MOHAN LAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this Court's order dtd. 29/4/2005 an observation was made to the effect that it is desirable that the matter relating to the number of Fast Track Court', vis-a-vis pendency of the cases may be worked out afresh. The learned Solicitor General thence stated that the Law Ministry would take effective steps in this behalf. However, the learned Solicitor General states that such an exercise has not been undertaken by the Central Government as yet.

(2.) IT is an accepted position that in various States, all the Fast Track Courts originally conceptualised have not been established. Some of the States and the High Courts had taken the stand that it is not necessary to have the number of Fast Track Courts originally contemplated to be established having regard to the fact that a large number of sessions cases have since been disposed of. It is also not in dispute that many Fast Track Courts instead and in place of sessions trials are dealing with other matters, including civil matters. In the aforementioned situation, in our opinion, a time has come to consider the question as to how best the allocation of Rs. 509 crores by the Central Government can be utilised in a better manner.

(3.) WE , therefore, request the High Courts to prepare appropriate scheme(s) which may be useful in this behalf for better administration of criminal justice in their respective States, if necessary, by appointing a small committee in this behalf; so as to enable this Court to know as to how many Fast Track Courts are required to be continued having regard to the pendency of the sessions trials and other criminal cases and as to how the excess amount generated thereby can be utilised by creating Fast Track Magisterial Courts. Undoubtedly, while making such a scheme, the impact thereof vis-a-vis the members of Higher Judicial Service who have been promoted on ad hoc basis and other relevant factors would be taken into consideration.