A bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Jayant Nath was also told that the Delhi government did not apply its mind when it had informed the court that the lone public prosecutor in each designated POCSO court can handle the burden of cases.
The submissions were made by an advocate, who has filed a PIL on lack of number of independent public prosecutors in courts handling cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, in his rejoinder to the Delhi government's affidavit of December 24, 2014.
Refuting the government's contention, advocate Gaurav Kumar Bansal has said in his rejoinder that "as per the list of pending cases provided by Additional Secretary (Home), Delhi government, the court of ASJ-1 of every district of national capital are overburdened and the number of cases in every court of Additional Sessions Judge(ASJ)-1 varies from 200 to 600 cases".
He has contended that he found out under the Right to Information (RTI) Act that each special court not only handles cases under POCSO, but also deals with cases under Drugs and Cosmetics Act, MCOCA, SEBI Act apart from general trial cases.
He has said that looking at the number of cases under the POCSO Act as well as other Acts in each of the special courts, completion of trial within stipulated time was not possible if more independent special public prosecutors are not appointed.