The Supreme Court, on March 4, expressed serious concerns regarding the increasing vacancies in the District Judiciary. This issue has resulted in significant delays in trials, particularly in Special Courts established for cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012.
Despite the establishment of Special Courts to expedite cases, these courts are now overburdened due to a shortage of judges. The Supreme Court acknowledged that while it had issued various directions to fast-track trials, the lack of judicial appointments has made effective implementation challenging.
A bench comprising Justices Bela M. Trivedi and PB Varale made these observations in a suo moto case addressing systematic shortcomings in handling POCSO-related offences. Senior Advocate VV Giri, who is also the court-appointed amicus curiae, highlighted that several directives had been issued regarding the establishment of Special POCSO Courts, appointment of Special Public Prosecutors, and training of legal professionals. However, compliance with these directives remains questionable.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Dismisses Rape Allegations Against Ex-Army Officer, Calls Case an Abuse of Law
During the hearing, Justice Bela M. Trivedi made a critical remark:
"We don't have judges. Where do we get the judges? Whose fault is it? All courts are overburdened. The vacancies remain unfilled. One has to be realistic. We are not getting judges at the district level."
She further pointed out the severe shortage of judges in Gujarat, stating that out of 213 judicial posts, only 6-10 had been filled. The lack of interest among aspiring candidates in taking up judicial roles has further aggravated the situation.
"Even at the infantry level in Gujarat, out of 213 posts, only 6-10 were filled. No one is preparing for these positions. The Special Courts for POCSO are created, but they are also overburdened. Even if infrastructure exists, there is no one to utilize it," she added.
Senior Advocate VV Giri recommended that a status report from the Registrar General of all High Courts be sought to assess the pendency of POCSO cases. However, Justice Bela remarked that the Supreme Court and High Courts are already monitoring multiple cases and have their limitations in tracking each one.
"Difficult to give further directions just for the sake of our directions. Directing the High Courts to furnish data would be a futile exercise, according to me," she stated.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Commutes Death Sentence of Father Who Killed His Children
She suggested that each High Court already maintains real-time data, which could be used to analyze the pendency of cases instead of requesting additional reports.
The Supreme Court ultimately decided to adjourn the matter, scheduling the next hearing for March 25. The bench indicated that it would likely dispose of the case during the next hearing but did not issue any new directives to the High Courts.
This case highlights a pressing issue within India’s judicial system—while infrastructure and legal provisions exist, the shortage of judges has left courts struggling to handle the increasing number of cases. The situation demands urgent attention from the government and judiciary to ensure timely justice delivery.
Case Details: IN RE ALARMING RISE IN THE NUMBER OF REPORTED CHILD RAPE INCIDENTS|SMW(Crl) No. 1/2019
