Cabinet extends fast-track courts for rape and POCSO cases to 2031 with ₹3,788 crore
In one line: The Centre has extended its fast-track court scheme for rape and child sexual abuse trials by five years and plans to raise the number of courts from 779 to 850.
Published 5 November 2026. Written by Pratidin from the reports linked at the end; every fact checked by a separate review before publishing. How we work
On 4 November 2026, the Union Cabinet chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi approved continuing the Centrally Sponsored Scheme for Fast Track Special Courts (FTSCs), including exclusive POCSO courts, for five more years, from 1 April 2026 to 31 March 2031. The total outlay is ₹3,788.04 crore. The Central share of ₹2,353.15 crore will come from the Nirbhaya Fund, and States and Union Territories will bear ₹1,434.89 crore. The scheme exists to speed up trials of rape cases and of offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. Each FTSC is staffed by one judicial officer, one dedicated special public prosecutor and six support staff.
According to the Cabinet decision, 779 FTSCs are functional today across 29 States and UTs, of which 399 are exclusive POCSO courts, and together they have disposed of 4,02,457 cases since the scheme began. The government now plans to run 850 FTSCs, with courts allotted on the basis of case pendency in each State. The scheme also encourages vulnerable witness deposition centres and child-friendly court spaces, so that victims can testify without facing the accused. A Centrally Sponsored Scheme is one where the Centre and States share costs; for this scheme the general sharing pattern is 60:40, and 90:10 for north-eastern and Himalayan States.
The scheme was launched on 2 October 2019, initially for one year, after the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2018 tightened punishment for rape and set time limits for investigation and trial. It also followed a Supreme Court direction of 25 July 2019, in a suo motu case on rising child rape incidents, that districts with more than 100 pending POCSO cases should have an exclusive special court. The scheme was extended to 31 March 2026 and has now been extended to 2031. The POCSO Act expects a special court to complete a trial within one year of taking cognizance. Earlier reviews of the scheme have flagged too few courts for the caseload, unspent Nirbhaya Fund money and a shortage of victim-friendly facilities, so closing the gap between that goal and actual pendency is the scheme's real test.
Prelims facts
- On 4 November 2026 the Cabinet extended the FTSC scheme from 1 April 2026 to 31 March 2031 with an outlay of ₹3,788.04 crore.
- The Central share of ₹2,353.15 crore comes from the Nirbhaya Fund; States and UTs bear ₹1,434.89 crore.
- 779 FTSCs, including 399 exclusive POCSO courts, are functional in 29 States and UTs and have disposed of 4,02,457 cases; the target is 850 courts.
- The scheme began on 2 October 2019 after the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2018 and a Supreme Court suo motu direction of 25 July 2019.
- Each FTSC has one judicial officer, one special public prosecutor and six support staff.
Quick recall
- Period of the extended FTSC scheme?
- 1 April 2026 to 31 March 2031 (FY 2026-27 to FY 2030-31).
- Total outlay of the extension?
- ₹3,788.04 crore.
- Source of the Central share?
- The Nirbhaya Fund (₹2,353.15 crore).
- How many FTSCs are functional, and how many are exclusive POCSO courts?
- 779, of which 399 are exclusive POCSO courts.
- Cases disposed of by FTSCs since inception?
- 4,02,457.
- When was the FTSC scheme launched?
- 2 October 2019.
- Staff of each FTSC?
- One judicial officer, one special public prosecutor and six support staff.
- Supreme Court threshold for an exclusive POCSO court in a district (2019)?
- More than 100 pending POCSO cases.
Prelims practice question
With reference to the Fast Track Special Courts (FTSC) scheme, consider the following statements:
1. It is a Central Sector Scheme fully funded by the Union government.
2. The Central share is funded from the Nirbhaya Fund.
3. It covers trials of rape cases and of offences under the POCSO Act, 2012.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
- 1 and 2 only
- 2 and 3 only
- 1 and 3 only
- 1, 2 and 3
Show answer
Answer: (b) 2 and 3 only. Statement 1 is wrong: it is a Centrally Sponsored Scheme, with States and UTs bearing ₹1,434.89 crore of the ₹3,788.04 crore outlay. Statements 2 and 3 are correct as per the Cabinet decision of 4 November 2026.
Use this in UPSC Mains: previous-year questions
Recurring theme: Justice for women and children: special courts, victim-centred procedure and pendency
- How to use this
Use the scheme to argue that certainty and speed of trial, not only harsher laws, deter sexual violence, and to suggest victim-centred court measures.
- 779 Fast Track Special Courts, 399 of them exclusive POCSO courts, have disposed of 4,02,457 cases since October 2019.
- Vulnerable witness deposition centres let victims testify without facing the accused.
- The Cabinet extended the scheme to 2031 with ₹3,788.04 crore, partly from the Nirbhaya Fund.
- How to use this
Cite the FTSC scheme as an example where delivering a legal right depends on joint funding and coordinated State capacity.
- The POCSO Act expects trials within a year, but delivery depends on a Centrally Sponsored Scheme with States bearing ₹1,434.89 crore.
- Only 779 of the planned 850 courts are functional, showing the gap between mandate and capacity.
Child protection institutions are the theme, though the question focuses on the digital era.
Mains practice question
Fast Track Special Courts have disposed of over four lakh cases since 2019, yet pendency in rape and POCSO cases remains a concern. Examine the role of these courts and suggest measures to make them more effective. (250 words)
Model answer
On 4 November 2026 the Cabinet extended the Fast Track Special Courts (FTSC) scheme to 31 March 2031 with ₹3,788.04 crore, ₹2,353.15 crore of it from the Nirbhaya Fund.
Role of FTSCs
- Speed: 779 functional courts, including 399 exclusive POCSO courts, have disposed of 4,02,457 cases since 2 October 2019.
- Legal mandate: the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2018 set time limits for investigation and trial; POCSO expects trials within a year of cognizance.
- Judicial push: the Supreme Court's 25 July 2019 suo motu direction sought exclusive POCSO courts in districts with over 100 pending cases.
- Victim-centred design: dedicated special public prosecutors, vulnerable witness deposition centres and child-friendly spaces.
Limitations
- Courts are fewer than needed: the plan is 850, against continuing pendency.
- Trials depend on police investigation and forensic reports; delays there stall courts.
- If judicial officers are drawn from the regular cadre, pendency can shift to other courts.
- Cost sharing (60:40, 90:10 for north-eastern and Himalayan States) depends on State budgets and timely releases.
Measures
- Allocate courts by pendency data, as the extension proposes, and fill vacancies quickly.
- Strengthen forensic laboratories and time-bound reporting.
- Make deposition centres and support persons universal.
- Track case-level timelines through e-Courts data and publish State-wise performance.
- Train judges and prosecutors in child-sensitive procedure.
FTSCs are a necessary bridge, but lasting speed needs a stronger whole chain of criminal justice, from investigation to judgment.
The basics
Why this matters
Delay in sexual offence trials hurts twice: victims relive trauma for years, and the deterrent value of punishment fades. Fast Track Special Courts are India's main administrative answer. To judge the extension, you need to know the law they enforce, how a Centrally Sponsored Scheme is funded, and where delay actually comes from.
The scheme in one view
- 1Courts850 planned; 779 functional now, 399 of them exclusive POCSO courts
- 2Staff per courtOne judicial officer, one special public prosecutor, six support staff
- 3Money₹3,788.04 crore; Centre ₹2,353.15 crore from the Nirbhaya Fund
- 4Victim supportVulnerable witness deposition centres and child-friendly spaces
The laws behind it
The POCSO Act, 2012 defines sexual offences against anyone below 18, requires special courts, and expects trials to finish within a year of cognizance. The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2018 raised punishments for rape and set two-month limits for investigation and trial in such cases. The Supreme Court then asked for exclusive POCSO courts in districts with over 100 pending cases. Together these produced the scheme in 2019.
- 2012POCSO Act enacted
- 2013Nirbhaya Fund set up for women's safety
- 2018Criminal Law (Amendment) Act sets time limits for rape cases
- 25 July 2019Supreme Court suo motu direction on POCSO courts
- 2 October 2019FTSC scheme launched for one year
- 4 November 2026Cabinet extends the scheme to 31 March 2031
Who pays
Under a Centrally Sponsored Scheme, the Centre designs and part-funds a programme that States run. Here the Central share comes from the Nirbhaya Fund, a dedicated, non-lapsable fund. States must add their share and provide judges and buildings.
Where delay really sits
A court can only move as fast as the case file. Judicial pendency and the criminal justice chain explains why investigation, forensic reports, witness protection and judge vacancies decide whether a fast-track court is actually fast.
Go deeper
Why it matters for UPSC
The story covers welfare mechanisms for vulnerable groups, the functioning of the judiciary and Centre-State scheme design. Prelims can test the scheme's numbers, the Nirbhaya Fund and the POCSO Act; Mains can ask about pendency, victim-centred justice and violence against women and children.
The core idea
The POCSO Act, 2012 and the 2018 criminal law amendment promised time-bound trials, but regular courts were overloaded. In 2019 the Centre launched FTSCs as a Centrally Sponsored Scheme, with its share paid from the Nirbhaya Fund. The scheme has disposed of 4,02,457 cases. But speed depends on more than courts, as Judicial pendency and the criminal justice chain shows.
Numbers and dates to remember
- Approved 4 November 2026; period 1 April 2026 to 31 March 2031.
- Outlay ₹3,788.04 crore: Centre ₹2,353.15 crore, States and UTs ₹1,434.89 crore.
- 779 courts now (399 exclusive POCSO) in 29 States and UTs; target 850.
- Launched 2 October 2019; Supreme Court direction 25 July 2019.
Where to go next
- POCSO Act, 2012: the law the exclusive courts enforce.
- Nirbhaya Fund: where the Central money comes from.
- Centrally Sponsored Scheme: how cost and control are shared.
- Judicial pendency and the criminal justice chain: why courts alone cannot end delay.
Go deeper: are special courts the answer to slow justice?
The case for. Dedicated courts concentrate judicial time on cases where delay causes special harm. Under the POCSO Act, 2012, a child may otherwise wait years to testify, with memory fading and pressure mounting. The scheme's 4,02,457 disposals, and features such as vulnerable witness deposition centres, show what focus can do. Ring-fenced money from the Nirbhaya Fund gives the scheme some protection from budget cuts.
The case for caution. If fast-track courts draw judges from the existing cadre, backlogs may shift rather than shrink. The chain explained in Judicial pendency and the criminal justice chain matters: charge sheets, forensic reports and witness attendance usually decide the pace of a trial. A Centrally Sponsored Scheme also depends on States releasing their share and providing staff and buildings; uneven State capacity means uneven results.
Design choices in the extension. Allotting courts by pendency data is a move toward need-based planning. The target of 850 courts against 779 functional suggests the main constraint is filling and running courts, not sanctioning them.
What would make it work. Fill judicial and prosecutor vacancies, fund forensic laboratories, make support persons and deposition centres universal, and publish State-wise disposal and pendency data so that performance, not just the number of courts, is tracked.
POCSO Act, 2012
The law that exclusive POCSO courts enforce.
In one line: The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 is a gender-neutral law that defines sexual offences against anyone below 18 and sets child-friendly trial procedures.
What it does
The Act defines offences such as penetrative sexual assault, sexual assault and sexual harassment, and using a child for pornography. It requires Special Courts and Special Public Prosecutors, child-friendly recording of statements, and protection of the child's identity. It expects the trial to be completed within one year of the court taking cognizance, as far as possible.
Why it is in the news
Exclusive POCSO courts are a large part of the FTSC scheme: 399 of the 779 functional courts. The Supreme Court's 2019 direction tied them to districts with over 100 pending POCSO cases.
Where to go next
Nirbhaya Fund
The dedicated fund that pays the Centre's share of the scheme.
In one line: The Nirbhaya Fund is a dedicated, non-lapsable Union fund created in 2013 to finance projects for the safety of women.
Background
The fund was announced after the December 2012 gang rape in Delhi. Non-lapsable means unspent money does not lapse at the end of the financial year. Ministries and States propose projects, such as one-stop centres, emergency response systems and safe city projects, which are appraised before money is released.
Why it is in the news
The ₹2,353.15 crore Central share of the extended FTSC scheme will be paid from this fund. Critics have often pointed to slow utilisation of the fund by States, so the scheme's success also depends on timely release and use.
Where to go next
Centrally Sponsored Scheme
The funding model that makes States partners in the courts.
In one line: A Centrally Sponsored Scheme is designed and part-funded by the Union but implemented by the States, which share the cost.
How it works
Central Sector Schemes are fully funded and run by the Union. Centrally Sponsored Schemes are run by States with cost shared in set ratios, commonly 60:40, and 90:10 for north-eastern and Himalayan States. The Union attaches conditions and monitors outcomes. Because administration of justice is largely a State responsibility, this model suits court schemes.
Why it is in the news
Of the ₹3,788.04 crore FTSC outlay, the States and UTs bear ₹1,434.89 crore. States must also provide judicial officers, prosecutors and infrastructure.
Where to go next
Judicial pendency and the criminal justice chain
Why the speed of a trial depends on police, forensics and judges together.
In one line: A criminal case moves through investigation, charge sheet, forensic evidence, trial and judgment; a delay at any link slows the whole chain.
The chain
Police must investigate and file a charge sheet. Forensic laboratories must report on samples. Prosecutors must bring witnesses, who must be protected and supported. Judges must be in post and not burdened with other dockets. Fast-track courts address the trial link, but if forensic reports or witnesses do not arrive, hearings are adjourned.
Why it is in the news
The 2018 criminal law amendment set two-month limits for investigation and trial in rape cases, and POCSO expects trials within a year. The FTSC extension adds courts but its results will depend on the rest of the chain.
Where to go next
Take the 5 November 2026 quiz: 30 Prelims-style questions with answers