Participating in the debate on the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Amendment Bill, 2026 in the Lok Sabha, Tharoor said the proposed law mandates investigations within two months and trials within three months through special fast-track courts, but argued that the existing judicial infrastructure is already under strain.

“The Bill talks about investigations completed within two months, trials within three months. It provides for special fast-track courts. But has our judicial system got the capacity? In 2025, Madam Chair, fast-track special courts registered 1.44 lakh new cases, but only disposed of 66,500,” Tharoor said.

He added, “Pendency in the existing fast-track courts is 245,579 cases. Fast-tracking is not going to be achieved by passing a bill alone. It requires adequate judges, prosecutors, timely investigations, efficient case management.”

What does the Bill propose?

The Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Amendment Bill, 2026 proposes stricter penalties for paper leak offences, higher fines for organised crimes and service providers, and mandates investigations within two months and trials within three months through Special Fast Track Courts. It also provides for a dedicated appeal mechanism before High Courts.

The proposed timelines, however, come as fast-track courts are already facing a rising caseload.

What is the current status of fast-track courts?

Government data shows two parallel systems currently operate across the country: Fast Track Courts (FTCs) and Fast Track Special Courts (FTSCs).

Fast Track Courts are established by states and Union Territories in consultation with their respective High Courts based on local requirements and available resources.

As of January 31, 2026, 862 Fast Track Courts were functional across 21 States and Union Territories, according to a Lok Sabha reply by the Ministry of Law and Justice.

These courts handle categories of cases identified by the states, including heinous crimes, cases involving women and children, senior citizens, persons with disabilities and long-pending property disputes.

Separately, the Centre has been running a Centrally Sponsored Scheme for Fast Track Special Courts (FTSCs) since October 2019. These courts are dedicated to the trial of pending rape cases and offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act.

The scheme has been extended until September 30, 2026. As of April 30, 2026, 775 Fast Track Special Courts, including 398 exclusive Pocso courts, were functional across 29 States and Union Territories, according to the Ministry of Law and Justice.

How many cases are reaching these courts?

The latest government data showed that the workload on FTSCs has risen steadily over the past three years.

In 2023, these courts registered 81,471 cases and disposed of 76,319, while 202,175 cases remained pending at the end of the year.

In 2024, fresh registrations increased to 88,902, with 85,595 cases disposed of. Pendency also rose to 204,122 cases.

The sharpest increase came in 2025. FTSCs received 143,936 new cases, but disposed of only 66,500, pushing pending cases to 245,579 by December 31, 2025.

How long do fast-track courts take to decide cases?

The Centre’s FTSC scheme is designed for expeditious trial and disposal of rape and Pocso cases.

However, the government does not prescribe a uniform average disposal time for these courts in the documents released publicly.

Why are cases still getting delayed?

The Ministry of Law and Justice said there are “several reasons that lead to delay in disposal of cases in courts”. These include the “availability of physical infrastructure, complexity of facts involved, quality of investigation, nature of evidence, co-operation of stakeholders viz. bar, investigation agencies, legal representation, forensic support, witnesses and litigants and proper application of rules and procedures.”

On judicial vacancies, the ministry said the recruitment of judges and staff is the responsibility of the respective state governments and High Courts.

It also said, “The primary responsibility for the development of infrastructure facilities for District and Subordinate Courts in the States/UTs, rests with the State/UT Governments,” while adding that the Union government provides financial assistance under a centrally sponsored scheme to augment states’ resources.