Fast-track courts for paper leak cases are finally taking shape. What happens next? | Mumbai News

Which cases will these special courts hear?

According to the Bombay High Court’s order, the two courts will conduct trials under:

1. The Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024
2. The Maharashtra Prevention of Malpractices at University, Board and Other Specified Examinations Act, 1982
3. Relevant provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023

The Public Examinations Act was enacted in 2024 after a series of alleged paper leak scandals across the country. It identifies 15 categories of “unfair means”, including leaking question papers or answer keys, tampering with answer sheets, violating examination security measures, and providing unauthorised assistance to candidates.

The law prescribes imprisonment ranging from three to five years for most offences. Where offences are committed as part of an organised crime network, the punishment can extend to 10 years.

The Maharashtra law, enacted in 1982, also criminalises offences such as question paper leaks and copying during examinations.

Will fast-track courts actually make trials faster?

Not necessarily. Fast-track courts do not follow a separate legal procedure or operate under a different law. In most cases, an existing court is designated to hear a particular category of cases on priority, often with directions to conduct hearings on a day-to-day basis or on fixed days every week.

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) says criminal trials should ideally conclude within two years, while some special laws, such as the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, prescribe a one-year timeline.

However, the pace of a trial depends on several factors, including the availability of witnesses, lawyers, judges and court infrastructure, as well as the complexity of the case. In practice, the designation of a fast-track court does not automatically guarantee quicker disposal.

How have fast-track courts fared in Maharashtra?

According to the Union Ministry of Law and Justice, Maharashtra had 38 fast-track special courts under the Centre’s scheme, including those dealing with POCSO cases, as of July 23. The actual number may be higher, as district courts can also designate regular courts to hear specific cases on priority.

One recent example was the special court that tried the Pune rape and murder case involving a minor girl. The trial concluded in less than 60 days, with the accused convicted and sentenced to death on June 30. During the trial, 55 witnesses were examined in just 16 days. The death sentence is now awaiting confirmation by the Bombay High Court.

While the creation of dedicated courts marks an important step in implementing the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, their success will ultimately depend on how quickly investigations are completed, witnesses are examined and courts are able to hear cases without delays. Experience with fast-track courts suggests that simply designating a court does not, by itself, ensure speedier justice.