The Supreme Court on Tuesday expressed serious concern over the mounting pendency of trials involving organised crime syndicates and grave offences prosecuted under central penal statutes, stressing the need for systemic solutions extending across the entire National Capital Region (NCR).
The Bench of Chief Justice of India Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi took suo motu cognisance of persistent jurisdictional conflicts in NCR, noting that such complexities had increasingly impeded effective investigation and timely adjudication in cases involving inter-State criminal networks.
It observed that prosecution under central statutes such as the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, and the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, were highly susceptible to delay when offences spanned multiple jurisdictions, adding that hardened criminals ought not to be permitted to derive any advantage from geographical boundaries.
The Apex Court noted that ambiguity regarding territorial jurisdiction, investigative authority, and competent trial forums frequently resulted in procedural impasses, which in practice benefitted entrenched offenders and undermined both public order and national security imperatives.
In addressing these challenges, the Court considered the establishment of 16 dedicated courts to hear cases related to the Gangster Act, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, and the National Investigation Agency Act, pertaining to organised crime in the National Capital Territory of Delhi. The courts were expected to become operational within a period of three months.
The Bench observed that such courts should be configured to take up only these categories of matters when listed, ensuring sustained judicial focus and continuous hearings. It highlighted that a dedicated docket mechanism would be instrumental in expediting trials involving terrorism, organised crime, and other offences of national significance.
Further, it evaluated potential legislative and administrative measures to mitigate NCR-wide jurisdictional overlaps. It examined whether a statutory regime analogous to the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act could be extended or adapted to the NCR, thereby enabling designated courts to exercise jurisdiction over offences occurring along inter-State borders without procedural delays or contestation.
Justice Bagchi observed that existing statutory provisions could be leveraged more effectively. He noted that the National Investigation Agency Act conferred supervening powers on the NIA to consolidate investigations spanning multiple States, and that such provisions could address fragmentation where multiple FIRs were registered across different jurisdictions in cases of organised crime.
During the proceedings, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati apprised the Court that a status report, sanctioned by the Union Home Secretary, had been submitted, identifying States with a high volume of NIA prosecutions, including trials linked to the Popular Front of India in Kerala and Bihar. The report also detailed draft norms and official communications formulated to address these concerns.
The Apex Court, however, expressed disapproval of the Union Home Secretary’s instruction for States to approach their respective High Courts, emphasizing that the issue required a coordinated, structural, and policy-driven intervention rather than piecemeal judicial engagement.
It further observed that the operationalisation of additional courts in Delhi, complemented by a geographically distributed network of special courts across the NCR—such as NIA courts in Delhi, PMLA courts in Noida, and other designated forums in Gurugram—would enhance case management efficiency and prevent accused persons from exploiting jurisdictional loopholes.
The post Supreme Court calls for comprehensive measures to reduce pendency in gangster-related cases in Delhi-NCR appeared first on India Legal.