UPSC CURRENT AFFAIRS – 18 March 2025

Home UPSC Current Affairs Centre’s allocations for justice-related schemes fluctuate

Centre’s allocations for justice-related schemes fluctuate

Why in News:

The India Justice Report 2025-26 highlights declining budget allocations and underutilization of funds for police modernization, forensic capacities, and prison reforms, while judiciary-related schemes show optimal fund utilization.

Introduction

The recently released India Justice Report 2025-26 highlights a decline in budgetary allocations and underutilization of funds in various justice-related schemes.
This trend has been particularly evident in the modernization of police forces, forensic capacities, and prison reforms.
At the same time, judicial infrastructure and legal aid schemes have shown consistent fund utilization, reflecting a mixed approach toward justice sector funding.

Modernisation Fund for State Police Forces

The Modernisation Fund for State Police Forces was established to upgrade police infrastructure and enhance the Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems (CCTNS).

Key Budgetary Trends:

Budget Estimates (BE) vs. Revised Estimates (RE)
- The BE for FY19 was ₹900 crore, which declined to ₹780 crore in FY21 and further to ₹587.97 crore in FY26.
- However, the actual spending has been significantly lower than the RE.
- In FY21, ₹780 crore was allocated but later revised to ₹106 crore.
- Similarly, in FY23, only ₹34.7 crore was spent despite an allocation of over ₹600 crore (only 6% utilization).

Implications:

Overestimation in Budget Estimates followed by drastic downward revisions in RE indicates poor financial planning.
Low actual expenditure suggests administrative inefficiencies in fund disbursement and implementation.

Modernisation of Forensic Capacities

The Modernisation of Forensic Capacities Scheme aims to strengthen forensic infrastructure and address the shortage of forensic scientists.

Key Budgetary Trends:

The scheme witnessed an initial increase in allocations but later faced fluctuations in funding.
No consistent pattern in allocations suggests a lack of long-term strategic planning in forensic modernization.

Implications:

The inconsistent funding may hinder the upgradation of forensic labs and investigative efficiency.
A weak forensic system impacts crime investigations and judicial proceedings, leading to delays in justice delivery.

Modernisation of Prisons Fund

Established over two decades ago, the Modernisation of Prisons Fund focuses on renovating prisons, constructing new cells, and improving living conditions for prisoners.

Key Budgetary Trends:
- Budget allocations peaked at ₹400 crore in FY23 but later declined to ₹300 crore in FY25 and FY26.
- Full utilization of funds was observed until FY23, but post-FY23, only 44% of allocated funds were utilized.
Implications:
- A reduction in funds could stall prison reforms, affecting overcrowding, hygiene, and security measures in jails.
- Underutilization post-FY23 indicates administrative bottlenecks in fund disbursement.

National Legal Services Authority (NALSA)

The NALSA fund is allocated to enhance free legal aid services across India.

Key Budgetary Trends:

Allocations increased gradually since FY19, remaining in the range of ₹150-200 crore.
FY24 (RE) saw a significant jump to ₹400 crore.
100% fund utilization reported consistently from FY19 to FY24.

Implications:

Efficient utilization of funds indicates the growing need and effectiveness of legal aid services.
Increased allocations in FY24 suggest an expansion of legal aid initiatives.

Development of Infrastructure Facilities for the Judiciary

This centrally sponsored scheme assists State governments in strengthening judicial infrastructure.

Key Budgetary Trends:

Consistent utilization of funds over the past five years.
Reduction in allocation from ₹1,123.40 crore (FY25) to ₹998 crore (FY26).

Implications:

Stable funding and full utilization indicate the importance of judiciary development in government priorities.
Slight decline in FY26 allocation suggests budgetary constraints but not a lack of commitment to judicial infrastructure.