Polity · 25 Jul 2026

Anwar Ali Sarkar case

Which one of the following statements regarding Fast-Track Courts (FTCs) in India is NOT correct?

AIn State of West Bengal vs Anwar Ali Sarkar (1952), the Supreme Court held that "speedier trial" alone is too vague a reason to justify routing cases to a special court.
BIn P. Rama Chandra Rao v. State of Karnataka (2002), a seven-judge bench ruled that it is judicially permissible to fix outer time limits for criminal trials.
CFast-Track Special Courts (FTSCs) for rape and POCSO cases are partly funded through the Nirbhaya Fund.
DAs of January, fast-track special courts had a disposal rate of around 96 percent, yet a large number of cases remained pending in them by the end of 2023.

Tests the ability to detect a reversed judicial holding embedded among otherwise accurate statements, requiring precise case-law recall rather than general familiarity.

Subscribe / Login in App →
This question is based on: Fast-Track Courts Can't Outrun Article 14 - or an Empty Courtroom
Take this in full test mode → Instructions for 25 Jul 2026
About this question

Why in news

PM Modi's promise of fast-track courts for exam paper leaks revived debate on the constitutional limits (Article 14) and administrative realities (judge vacancies, forensic capacity) constraining such courts' effectiveness.

Why for UPSC

"Not correct" format questions are used sparingly by UPSC but are effective at testing whether an aspirant has internalised the precise, sometimes counter-intuitive, holding of a case rather than a plausible guess.

Prelims summary

Anwar Ali Sarkar (1952) requires a rational classification, not mere speed, to justify special courts; P. Rama Chandra Rao (2002) held that courts cannot be judicially bound to fixed trial deadlines - only aspirational guidance exists.

On web, answers are shown once after a test — no save or reattempt. For unlimited reattempts, Hindi medium, and Mentor Observations, use the TAN App.