The Supreme Court, in a suo motu proceeding concerning the establishment of exclusive courts under special statutes, expressed concern over the increasing number of offences under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act across the country. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana noted that despite some progress, the establishment of exclusive special courts for the expeditious trial of NDPS cases remained incomplete in several states.
The Court was informed that out of 449 courts identified as necessary for handling NDPS cases, 176 had been established so far. It observed that, with the support of the central and state governments and initiatives by various High Courts, the objective of its earlier orders had been largely achieved in respect of courts under Section 11 of the National Investigation Agency (NIA) Act. However, the situation regarding NDPS courts required further attention.
The bench stated that, given the current pendency under the NDPS Act and the unfortunate alarming increase in such offences on a pan-India basis, it was expedient and in the interest of justice to establish the requisite courts at the earliest. Consequently, it directed the Union of India and all States and Union Territories to take necessary steps for providing infrastructure and appointing the necessary staff so that exclusive special courts for NDPS cases could be established, preferably within six weeks.
During the hearing, additional submissions were made regarding the status of NIA courts, which the Court also monitored as part of the broader suo motu case. The Attorney General for Karnataka informed the Court that the state proposed to set up three special exclusive courts for NIA cases and would notify them within two weeks. For Kerala, it was submitted that orders had been issued for two such courts, though the counsel sought additional time citing infrastructure requirements. The Court refused to grant time beyond four weeks, with the Chief Justice commenting that Kerala’s proactive High Court should not be making such requests. The two courts were directed to become functional within one month.
In Tamil Nadu, it was stated that there were 28 pending NIA cases, and two courts were being established, one of which was already operational. The counsel confirmed that the second court would become operational within two weeks. Regarding Telangana, the Chief Justice noted that only one court was required, given the 13 pending cases under Section 11 of the NIA Act, and directed that it be established within two weeks.
Assam reported that one special exclusive NIA court had been notified and made functional, with proposals for two others under consideration. The Court noted the state’s pendency of 26 cases and directed it to expedite the pending proposals within four weeks. For Jammu and Kashmir, counsel submitted that while one court could be operationalised immediately in Jammu, the region required three additional courts due to 47 pending NIA cases. It was suggested that existing district judges’ courts could be re-designated as special exclusive courts for NIA cases by withdrawing other work.
The Court’s primary directive, however, remained focused on the NDPS Act. It reiterated that the establishment of exclusive special courts for the trial of NDPS cases was essential to address the rising tide of narcotics-related offences and ensure timely justice. The six-week timeline was set as a target for compliance by all relevant governments.