India’s child protection justice system marked a headline-grabbing moment in 2025 when fast track special courts disposed of more child sexual offence cases than were registered that year under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. With a 109% disposal rate, the moment was widely read as proof that long-pending backlogs were finally breaking. Yet, behind this numerical milestone lies a more troubling reality: faster case closures have not translated into stronger convictions or better outcomes for child survivors.
What the 2025 milestone actually signals
In 2025, fast track special courts closed 87,754 POCSO cases against 80,320 newly registered ones. On paper, this suggests an efficient system racing ahead of new filings. The courts — set up after directions from the and funded through the — now number 773 nationwide, with about 400 dedicated to POCSO matters. Since their launch in 2019, they have collectively disposed of over 3.5 lakh cases.
However, efficiency measured only through disposals hides the quality of justice delivered. Case closure does not automatically mean accountability or child-centric outcomes.
Why faster disposal has not meant stronger convictions
Conviction rates under POCSO have steadily declined even as courts have sped up. From around 35% in 2019, convictions fell to about 29% by 2023. Fast track courts themselves average even lower conviction rates, close to 19%. If higher disposal were strengthening justice, conviction levels should have risen alongside speed. Instead, in many States, more accused are acquitted than convicted.
This trend points to hurried investigations, incomplete charge sheets and delayed forensic reports — problems particularly acute in high-burden States such as Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra. Speed, in these conditions, often comes at the cost of evidentiary strength.
The original promise of the POCSO Act
The was enacted in 2012 precisely because general criminal law failed to recognise the specific vulnerabilities of child survivors. It promised child-friendly procedures, in-camera trials, time-bound hearings and a system sensitive to the psychological needs of children.
Fast track courts were meant to reinforce this vision. But when procedural timelines are prioritised over survivor support, the law’s foundational promise is weakened rather than fulfilled.
Support systems that remain largely on paper
Children navigating POCSO trials require more than quick hearings. They need trained support persons, sensitive police handling, effective legal aid and child welfare committees that can ensure care and compensation during — not after — the trial. Section 39 of the Act mandates the appointment of support persons, a requirement reiterated by the Supreme Court in 2021 and elaborated in 2024 guidelines by the .
Yet, many States have failed to empanel these support persons. As a result, cases collapse even before trial, and children are left to navigate intimidating legal processes alone.
PLVs and the weak first point of contact
In December 2025, the Supreme Court directed that para-legal volunteers (PLVs) be appointed at every police station for POCSO cases. Ground reports show vast gaps in compliance. Several States have PLVs in only a fraction of police stations, while others have none at all.
Without PLVs, families often face delays in FIR registration, intimidation and evidence loss at the very first stage. Well-documented cases from Uttar Pradesh illustrate how early police inaction or hostility can derail justice irreversibly — failures that timely legal assistance could have prevented.
Compensation delays and judicial contradictions
POCSO allows courts to grant interim compensation at any stage, especially when a child’s education or health is at risk. In practice, most courts wait until final judgments. By then, years of schooling may be lost and family incomes depleted. Even after verdicts, compensation is frequently delayed, prompting repeated reprimands from High Courts.
At the same time, judicial inconsistencies — including acquittals or leniency based on subsequent marriages between survivor and accused — undermine the spirit of the law and push vulnerable girls into lifelong dependence on their abusers.
What workable reforms look like on the ground
Evidence from States such as Madhya Pradesh shows that targeted interventions can improve outcomes. Faster forensic processing, focused recording of testimony and closer monitoring of weak cases have led to better conviction rates there. Civil society studies, including those by the , point to practical fixes such as RTI-based tracking of support persons, strict forensic deadlines and regular conviction audits to identify systemic failures early.
What to note for Prelims?
- POCSO Act, 2012: objectives and child-friendly provisions.
- Fast Track Special Courts: origin, funding via Nirbhaya Fund, and current numbers.
- Role of NCPCR and support persons under Section 39.
- Para-legal volunteers (PLVs) and Supreme Court directions.
What to note for Mains?
- Critical evaluation of disposal rates versus conviction quality.
- Institutional gaps in investigation, forensics and survivor support.
- Federal and State-level variations in implementation.
- Reforms needed to align speed with substantive justice under POCSO.
