Examine the role of fast-track courts in ensuring speedy justice, with reference to the 2026 anti-cheating law amendments.

Q. Examine the role of fast-track courts in ensuring speedy justice, with reference to the 2026 anti-cheating law amendments. (15 marks, 250-350 words)

Speedy trial is an implied fundamental right under Article 21, yet over 4.4 crore cases pend in district courts, with persistent judicial vacancies [4]. Fast-track courts are a targeted institutional response, and the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Amendment Bill, 2026 extends this model to exam malpractice [1].

Why fast-track courts aid speedy justice - Dedicated jurisdiction: designated courts hear a narrow category of offences, avoiding competition with a general docket. The Centrally Sponsored Fast Track Special Courts scheme (2019) for rape and POCSO cases institutionalised this design [3]. - Procedural compression: day-to-day hearings, time-bound trials and specialised prosecutors reduce adjournments. - Deterrence: swift conviction restores the credibility of law where delay itself becomes the reward for the offender.

The 2026 amendments as an application - Every State/UT must designate a Court of Session as a Special Fast Track Court exclusively for exam-fraud offences, backed by Special Public Prosecutors [1]. - Trials run day-to-day, to be completed within three months of chargesheet; investigation is capped at two months, with a central Special Task Force empowered to probe [1]. - Appeals go to a two-judge High Court Bench, ordinarily decided in three months [1]. - Penalties rise to 10 years' imprisonment and ₹50 lakh for individuals, and a ₹10 crore minimum fine for organised crime networks — matching the scale of leak rackets affecting UPSC, SSC and NTA examinations [1][2].

Limitations - The Bill prescribes deadlines but no consequence for breach, risking directory rather than mandatory compliance [1]. - Courts are redesignated, not newly created; without added judges, staff and forensic capacity, pendency merely shifts [4].

Fast-track courts can convert legislative intent into timely justice only when matched by investigative capacity and judicial strengthening. Filling sanctioned vacancies, funding infrastructure alongside the designation of courts, and reforming exam-conduct systems upstream would make the 2026 framework genuinely deterrent — advancing both Article 21's promise of speedy trial and equity of opportunity for millions of aspirants.

(~320 words)

Sources: 1. PRS Legislative Research — The Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Amendment Bill, 2026 — Special Fast Track Courts, special public prosecutors, two-month probe and three-month trial deadlines, STF, appeals, enhanced penalties, absence of consequence for breach 2. PRS Legislative Research — The Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Bill, 2024 — parent Act's coverage of UPSC, SSC, NTA and other recruitment bodies 3. PIB — Cabinet approves continuation of Centrally Sponsored Scheme for Fast Track Special Courts — FTSC scheme design for rape/POCSO cases 4. PRS Legislative Research — Pendency and Vacancies in the Judiciary — district court pendency and judicial vacancies constraining capacity