Cabinet approves continuation of the Centrally Sponsored Scheme for Fast Track Special Courts (FTSCs) for expeditious trial of cases of rape and POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) Act for a further perio...

1. At a Glance

• What it is: a Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) that funds dedicated Fast Track Special Courts for rape cases and offences under the POCSO Act, 2012. A sub-set of these are exclusive POCSO Courts [1].
• Latest decision: on 04 Nov 2026 the Union Cabinet extended the scheme for five years (01.04.2026–31.03.2031). The outlay is Rs.3,788.04 crore and the number of courts rises from 779 to 850 [1].
• Legal origin: the scheme is rooted in a statute, the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2018, and in a Supreme Court direction, Suo Motu Writ (Crl.) No. 1/2019 [1].
• UPSC relevance: it links several syllabus areas: judicial pendency, gender justice, child rights, fiscal federalism (CSS pattern, Nirbhaya Fund) and victim-centric justice (GS-I, II and IV).

2. Why in the News

• 04 Nov 2026: the Cabinet approved continuing the FTSC scheme, including exclusive POCSO Courts, until 31.03.2031. The previous extension had ended on 31.03.2026 [1].
• The new cycle runs for five years. The earlier extensions ran for one year (2019–20), then two, then three (2023–26) [1][2].
• The scheme is also expanding: courts go 779 → 850, and new districts are chosen using case-pendency data [1].

3. Background & Evolution

• Rationale: a large backlog of rape and POCSO trials. Parliament made stricter timelines law through the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2018, and the scheme was launched under it [1][6].
• Judicial push: on 25.07.2019 the SC, in Suo Motu Writ (Crl.) No. 1/2019, directed that exclusive POCSO Special Courts be set up in every district with more than 100 pending POCSO cases [1].
• Milestones:
• 2019: 1,023 FTSCs were planned for speedy disposal of rape and POCSO cases [9].
• 02.10.2019: the scheme launched, initially for one year [1][2].
• 2021: extended by two years, to 31.03.2023 [2].
• 2023: an IIPA third-party evaluation recommended continuing the scheme for at least three years [2][11].
• 29 Nov 2023: Cabinet extended it from 01.04.2023 to 31.03.2026. The outlay was Rs.1,952.23 crore, of which the Central Share was Rs.1,207.24 crore from the Nirbhaya Fund [2].
• Dec 2023: 757 FTSCs, including 411 exclusive POCSO Courts, were functional in 30 States/UTs. They had disposed of more than 2,14,000 cases [6].
• Jan 2025: 754 FTSCs, including 404 POCSO Courts, had disposed of over 3.06 lakh cases [7].
• 30 Sep 2025: 773 FTSCs, including 400 e-POCSO Courts, were functional in 29 States/UTs. Jharkhand chose to exit the scheme by a letter dated 07 Jul 2025 [3].
• 04 Nov 2026: the scheme was extended to 2031 [1].

4. Core Static Facts

5. Multi-Dimensional Analysis

Legal / Constitutional

• The scheme draws on both a statute and a court order: the CLA 2018 and the SC suo motu direction [1].
• It puts into practice the speedy-trial part of Article 21, as read by the courts. It also gives effect to the POCSO s.35 timelines (30-day evidence, 1-year trial) [8].
• Mandated timelines are only as good as court capacity. A dedicated Special Public Prosecutor in each court addresses the prosecution-side bottleneck [1].

Social / Gender / Child Rights

• VWDCs and child-friendly spaces reduce secondary victimisation, where the trial process itself traumatises the victim again [1].
• Faster verdicts strengthen deterrence and public trust, and help keep victims from turning hostile because of long delays.

Economic / Fiscal federalism

• The Central Share is ~62% of the outlay (2,353.15 / 3,788.04). This fits a mix of 60:40 and 90:10 splits [1][3].
• The outlay grew from Rs.1,952.23 cr for 3 years to Rs.3,788.04 cr for 5 years. That is higher spending per year, partly driven by the larger number of courts [1][2].
• The scheme is funded by the Nirbhaya Fund, a non-lapsable corpus. This protects it from the lapse of unspent money at year end [2].

Administrative

• Because participation is voluntary, coverage is not universal. 29 States/UTs take part, and Jharkhand exited in 2025 [1][3].
• The number of functional courts has never reached the target: 1,023 planned (2019) vs 773–779 functional [9][3][1].
• Need-based expansion uses pendency data to send courts where backlogs are heaviest [1].

Ethical / Governance

• Monitoring relies on data: a dashboard, expenditure statements and High Court inputs. Third-party evaluations (IIPA, and an NPC report) support evidence-based renewal [1][11].
• There is a tension between speed and fair-trial safeguards. Courts under pressure to dispose of cases fast must still protect the rights of the accused.

6. Recent Developments (last 12–18 months)

• Jan 2025: 754 FTSCs, including 404 POCSO Courts, had disposed of over 3.06 lakh cases [7].
• 07 Jul 2025: Jharkhand wrote that it would exit the scheme [3].
• 30 Sep 2025: 773 FTSCs, including 400 e-POCSO Courts, were functional in 29 States/UTs [3].
• Dec 2025: the Government said no proposal is under consideration to widen the scheme to other categories of cases [3].
• 31 Mar 2026: the 2023–26 cycle, covering 790 courts, ended [3].
• 04 Nov 2026: Cabinet extended the scheme to 31.03.2031: Rs.3,788.04 cr, 850 courts, 4,02,457 cases disposed so far [1].

7. Prelims Hooks

• FTSC scheme launched on 02 October 2019 [1].
• Implementing agency: Department of Justice, Ministry of Law & Justice (not MHA, not MWCD) [1].
• Launched under the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2018 [1].
• SC direction: Suo Motu Writ (Crl.) No. 1/2019, dated 25.07.2019. It requires exclusive POCSO courts in districts with more than 100 pending POCSO cases [1].
• Central Share is funded from the Nirbhaya Fund, a non-lapsable corpus run by the DEA, Ministry of Finance [1][2].
• 2026–31 outlay: Rs.3,788.04 crore, of which the Centre pays Rs.2,353.15 cr and States/UTs Rs.1,434.89 cr [1].
• FTSCs to rise from 779 to 850 [1].
• 399 of the 779 functional FTSCs are exclusive POCSO Courts [1].
• 4,02,457 cases disposed of since inception [1].
• 29 States/UTs participate, and participation is voluntary [1].
• Each court unit: 1 Judicial Officer + 1 Special Public Prosecutor + 6 support staff [1].
• The previous cycle (2023–26) cost Rs.1,952.23 cr [2].
• POCSO s.35: child's evidence within 30 days, trial within one year "as far as possible" [8].
• Third-party evaluation in 2023 by IIPA [2][11].

8. What the Disposal Number Does Not Tell You

• "Cases disposed" is not the same as "justice delivered"
• The Government reports one success number: cases disposed. It rose from 3,61,055 (30.11.2025) [19] to 4,02,457 (Nov 2026) [1].
• A case counts as "disposed" when it ends in any way: conviction, acquittal, or transfer to another court.

• So the number shows how fast courts are closing files. It does not show how many offenders were punished.

• The conviction picture is weak, and it is not tracked for FTSCs separately

• Conviction rate means: out of all trials that were completed, the share that ended in a conviction.
• Under POCSO, this was 24.6% in 2014 [18]. It was 34.9% in 2019 [14].
• In plain terms, about two of every three completed POCSO trials still ended without a conviction.

• None of the Government releases in this note gives an FTSC-only conviction rate. So we cannot tell whether faster courts are also better courts.

• To be fair, the speed gain is real

• The NPC evaluation found that pendency fell after the scheme began, based on High Court reports [12].
• Pendency means the number of cases still waiting in court.
• So the right criticism is not that FTSCs failed. It is that speed is the only thing being measured.

9. Why Forensic Labs, Not Judges, Set the Pace

• A trial cannot move until the lab report comes
• In rape and POCSO trials, the court usually needs FSL and DNA reports as evidence. FSL means Forensic Science Laboratory.
• The NPC evaluation (Dec 2020) found that these reports often reached the court late, because there were very few labs [12].

• For example, Karnataka had only two forensic labs [12].

• So a fast court can still be a slow trial

• NPC found FTSC cases usually stayed pending for about a year, mainly because forensic reports were delayed [12].
• That uses up the whole one-year limit in POCSO s.35 [8] before the court can act.

• Adding courts (779 → 850) [1] does not fix this, because the 2026–31 scheme funds judges, prosecutors and staff, not labs [1].

• Other delays also sit outside the courtroom

• A Government reply in Parliament named judicial vacancies, frequent adjournments and weak case-tracking as causes of delay [20].
• An adjournment is when a hearing is put off to a later date.

10. Money Sanctioned vs Money Actually Released

• Less money has gone out than was promised
• For 2023–26 alone, the Centre sanctioned Rs.1,207.24 crore as its share [2].
• But total central releases from the start in 2019 to 02.03.2026 were only Rs.1,210.92 crore [13].

• So about six and a half years of actual spending roughly equals what was sanctioned for three years.

• Why this happens: the Centre only reimburses courts that are working

• Funds go on a reimbursement basis, linked to the number of functional courts in each State/UT [15]. Reimbursement means the State spends first and the Centre pays it back later.
• If a State cannot staff a court, it gets no money for that court. Unspent money is a sign of missing courts, not a budget cut.

• In FY 2024-25, the Centre released about Rs.173.59 crore against a budget of about Rs.200 crore [15].

• The new budget is much bigger than what has actually been released

• The 2026–31 Central Share of Rs.2,353.15 crore [1] works out to about Rs.470 crore a year.
• That is more than double the FY 2024-25 release [15].

• Whether this money is spent depends on States actually staffing 850 courts. The past record says that is not certain.

• Parliament has raised this before

• In March 2021, the Standing Committee on Home Affairs found that only 39% of Nirbhaya Fund allocations had been disbursed [16]. Disbursed means actually paid out.

11. Why the Court Count Never Reaches the Target

• The number of working courts has stayed flat for three years
• Target in 2019: 1,023 courts [9].
• March 2021: only 597 were working [16].
• December 2023: 757 [6]. June 2025: 725 [17]. September 2025: 773 [3]. 2026: 779 [1].

• The new target of 850 is about 9% above a number that has hardly moved since 2023.

• The scheme's design lets States slow down or leave

• Joining is voluntary [1], so no State is required to take part.
• The State has to pay salaries first and its own 40% (or 10%) share before it is reimbursed [3][15]. This puts pressure on poorer States' cash flow.

• Jharkhand left the scheme by a letter dated 07.07.2025 [17]. The sources do not give its reason. But the design makes leaving easy.

• What follows for 850

• Courts are now being placed using pendency data [1]. That helps send them where backlogs are biggest.
• But a court only counts once a judge, a prosecutor and six staff are in place [1]. States have never managed this for the full target.

12. What the Evaluators Asked For That Is Still Pending

• NPC: build labs and put a deadline on forensic reports
• The National Productivity Council recommended more forensic labs and a fixed time limit for FSL reports [12].

• Actor: MHA and State Home Departments, which run forensic labs. The 2026 extension does not address this [1].

• IIPA: the right people in the court, not just more courts

• The IIPA evaluation (2023) asked States and High Courts to appoint Special Judges with POCSO experience [11].
• It also asked for sensitisation training and for women public prosecutors [11]. Sensitisation training teaches court staff how to deal gently with victims.

• The 2026 cycle adds a dedicated Special Public Prosecutor to each court [1]. This is a first step, but it does not require that prosecutor to be a woman or to have POCSO experience.

• Standing Committee on Home Affairs: watch the money centrally

• It recommended a central-level committee to oversee how the Nirbhaya Fund is used [16].

• Actor: Ministry of Finance (DEA), which holds the fund [2], together with the Department of Justice.

• Department of Justice: publish conviction data, not just disposal data

• The FTSC Dashboard already collects data from High Courts [1].
• Adding conviction and acquittal figures for each court would show whether faster trials are also fair and effective. The current releases do not report this [1][19].

13. Anchors for Answers

• Data: POCSO conviction rate 34.9% in 2019, up from 24.6% in 2014. About two in three completed trials still did not end in conviction [14][18]
• Data: Rs.1,210.92 crore released by the Centre from 2019 to 02.03.2026, roughly equal to the Rs.1,207.24 crore sanctioned for 2023–26 alone [13][2]
• Data: Working courts stayed between 725 and 779 from 2023 to 2026, against a 2019 target of 1,023 [6][17][1][9]
• Report/Committee: NPC third-party evaluation, Dec 2020. Found forensic delays and recommended more labs and a time limit for FSL reports [12]
• Report/Committee: IIPA evaluation, 2023. Recommended Special Judges with POCSO experience, sensitisation training and women prosecutors [11]
• Report/Committee: Standing Committee on Home Affairs, March 2021. Found only 597 of 1,023 courts working and only 39% of Nirbhaya Fund allocations disbursed [16]
• Law/Case: POCSO s.35 (child's evidence within 30 days, trial within one year) [8]. Suo Motu WP (Crl.) 1/2019 [1]
• Scheme: Nirbhaya Fund. It pays the FTSC Central Share, and its slow payouts have been flagged by Parliament [2][16]

14. Mains Relevance

• GS-II: Structure and functioning of the judiciary. Government policies and interventions. Mechanisms to protect vulnerable sections (women, children). Centre–State relations (CSS).
• GS-I: Social empowerment and issues related to women.
• GS-III: Government budgeting (earmarked funds such as the Nirbhaya Fund).
• GS-IV: Justice, compassion and victim-centric ethics in public administration.
• Question stems: 1. "Fast Track Special Courts have sped up disposal but have not ended pendency in sexual-offence cases." Critically examine with reference to the FTSC scheme. (15 marks) 2. Discuss the role of judicial directions in shaping executive schemes, citing the Fast Track Special Courts and exclusive POCSO Courts. (10 marks) 3. A victim-centric criminal justice system needs more than speed. Evaluate measures such as Vulnerable Witness Deposition Centres and child-friendly courts. (10 marks)

15. Related Topics to Study Next

• POCSO Act, 2012 (and the 2019 amendment): the core law whose trials the FTSCs hear.
• Nirbhaya Fund: the funding source. Study its utilisation record and administering ministry.
• Criminal Law (Amendment) Acts of 2013 and 2018: how the punishment and timeline regime for sexual offences developed.
• BNS / BNSS / BSA, 2023: the new criminal codes that now set investigation and trial procedure.
• Fast Track Courts under the 11th and 14th Finance Commissions: the earlier, generic fast-track court model.
• Judicial pendency and the National Judicial Data Grid: the wider backlog context.
• NCRB "Crime in India": data on rape and POCSO cases, conviction rates and pendency.
• One Stop Centres / Mission Shakti: other Nirbhaya Fund schemes for women's safety.

16. NCERT Concepts to Revise

• Fast-track courts (Polity): The scheme is the 2019 successor of earlier fast-track courts; knowing their history shows why it exists.
• POCSO Act 2012 (Polity): These courts try POCSO and rape cases, and section 35 sets the timelines the note keeps citing.
• Nirbhaya Fund (Polity): It pays the Central Share, and its slow payouts explain the gap between money sanctioned and released.
• Centrally sponsored schemes (Economy): The scheme is a CSS with shared Centre-State funding and voluntary State participation, so the funding pattern matters.
• Judicial pendency (Polity): Clearing the backlog of rape and POCSO trials is the scheme's goal, and disposal numbers measure it.
• Suo motu cognizance (Polity): The Supreme Court's own-motion case in 2019 ordered exclusive POCSO courts, a key legal origin.

17. Common Errors / Trap Areas

• Wrong ministry: the scheme is run by the Department of Justice, not the MHA or MWCD. The Nirbhaya Fund itself sits with the DEA, MoF [1][2].
• Getting the subset backwards: exclusive POCSO Courts are a subset of FTSCs (399 of 779). They are not a separate scheme [1].
• Staffing numbers changed: the 2026 release lists 6 support staff plus a dedicated Special Public Prosecutor. Earlier descriptions listed 7 support staff [1][3]. Use the latest release.
• Court counts vary by date: 1,023 planned (2019), 790 sanctioned (2023–26), 773 functional (Sep 2025), 779 functional and 850 proposed (2026) [9][3][1]. Always note the date with the number.
• Timeline confusion: some PIB summaries say the CLA 2018 sets 2-month investigation and trial deadlines [10]. But the POCSO s.35 trial target is one year [8]. Do not mix the two up.
• Not universal: participation is voluntary, and Jharkhand exited in 2025 [1][3].