New Delhi: In a significant move to overhaul the pace of justice in cases involving national security, the Supreme Court of India has sought a formal response from the Chief Secretaries of 17 States and Union Territories. The top court is concerned about the alarming delay in trials conducted by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) and is pushing for the establishment of "Exclusive Special Courts" to handle these high-stakes matters.
A bench comprising CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice NV Anjaria highlighted that the backlog in regular district courts is suffocating the progress of NIA trials. The Court emphasized that when trials are dragged out for years, it doesn't just hurt the accused; it compromises witness protection and the very integrity of the legal process.
The Supreme Court’s intervention comes at a time when the gap between filing a charge sheet and reaching a verdict in terror-related cases has become uncomfortably wide. During the hearing, the bench noted that delays are often used as a tactical tool.
CJI Surya Kant shared a poignant observation from the bench, recalling how, in earlier days, defense lawyers would sometimes avoid letting a witness even take a bathroom break during cross-examination. Why? Because there was a constant fear that the Investigating Officer might influence the witness during that short gap. Today, the challenge has shifted. Now, the primary tactic is to delay the trial for so long that witnesses lose memory, lose interest, or are eventually won over, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
By creating dedicated courts that do nothing but NIA cases, the judiciary hopes to ensure that trials are conducted on a day-to-day basis, leaving no room for such external influences or tactical "tarikh-pe-tarikh" (date after date) cultures.
The Union Government presented a status report indicating that there are currently 17 regions in India where more than 10 NIA trials are pending. The Court has issued notices to the Chief Secretaries of these states, requiring them to explain why specialized infrastructure hasn't been prioritized.
The list of states includes:
- High Pendency Areas: Delhi (leading with 59 pending cases), Assam, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, J&K, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra, Punjab, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Telangana.
- The Manipur Context: Even Manipur, despite its lower number of pending cases (10), has been asked to speed up the process of designating a specific court for these trials.
The Advocate Generals of these states have been directed to appear before the Court (either physically or virtually) in the next hearing to provide concrete timelines.
Representing the Union of India, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aishwarya Bhatti informed the bench that the Central Government is not just demanding results but also providing the means to achieve them.
As of January 2026, the Union has issued new norms to provide financial assistance of â‚ą1 Crore to each state for setting up an "Exclusive Special Court." This funding covers both recurring and non-recurring expenditures on a reimbursement basis. This move effectively removes the "lack of funds" excuse that states often cite when delaying judicial infrastructure projects.
While 17 states are under scrutiny, the ASG highlighted some recent success stories in the designation of exclusive courts:
- Patna (Bihar): A Gazette Notification dated January 8, 2026, designated the Court of District & Additional Sessions Judge-XV as an Exclusive NIA Court.
- Ranchi & Jammu: Dedicated courts were established in 2024 to handle the heavy load in these sensitive regions.
- Mumbai: Court No. 25 at the City Civil Court, Bombay, is now an exclusive NIA trial center.
- Ahmedabad: Proposals are currently being fast-tracked to designate the Additional Principal Judge of the City Civil Court as the NIA lead judge.
You might wonder: Why can’t a regular Sessions Judge handle an NIA case? The answer lies in the complexity and volume. NIA cases often involve hundreds of witnesses, digital evidence, and international links. When these cases are placed in a regular district court, they have to compete with thousands of other cases like theft, property disputes, and local crimes.
An "Exclusive Special Court" means the judge handles only NIA matters. This allows for:
- Continuous Trial: No interruptions from other cases.
- Witness Safety: Better security protocols for sensitive witnesses.
- Expertise: Judges become specialists in the UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act) and other special statutes.
The Supreme Court’s message is loud and clear: National security trials cannot be treated like routine litigation. The delay in justice is a double-edged sword—it keeps potentially innocent people behind bars for years without a verdict, and it allows potentially dangerous individuals to exploit the system's slowness.
By summoning the Chief Secretaries, the Supreme Court has moved the issue from the "legal file" to the "administrative priority" list. The next hearing will be crucial, as states will have to explain their progress—or lack thereof—in securing the nation’s judicial frontiers.
Stay tuned to this portal for more updates as we follow the Supreme Court's push for a faster, more efficient criminal justice system in India.