Inordinate delay in trial of minor offences due to prosecution lapses violates speedy trial right under Article 21 warranting quashing of proceedings by constitutional courts.

ORDER :

“Crime and the actions of the criminal justice system are mutually responsive, influencing each other in ways that are only minimally predictable; general changes in the political and socio-economic climate will affect both crime and the criminal justice system in a similar manner.”

[Alfred Blumstein in Encyclopedia of Crime and Justice, Khadish (Ed.)]

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal arises from the order passed by the High court of Allahabad dated 23.02.2006 in application under Section 482 No. 20610 of 2024 by which the application preferred by the appellant-herein praying for quashing of the criminal proceedings of Case No. 545 of 1991 arising out of Case Crime No. 115 of 1989 registered with the GRP Rambagh Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”) respectively and Section 120 of the Railways Act came to be dismissed.

3. It appears from the materials on record that one Gajendra Singh, constable No. 614, posted at the relevant point of time, at GRP Rambagh, Distt. Gonda, Allahabad lodged a First Information Report with the GRP Rambagh police station referred to above against the appellant-herein and four other police constables for the offences enumerated above.

4. The FIR dated 19.02.1989 reads thus:

“Respectfully submitted that on 19.2.1989 at about 20:00 hours I was going to Mess No 1 At that time Constable No. 57 Shiv Charan Tiwari; Constable No 95 Arvind Kumai” Constable No. 51 Kailash Katariya, Constable No. 90 Harish Chandra Joshi and Constable No. 190 Kailash Chandra Kapri who had come from District Almora; for Kumbh Mela duty at G.R.P., began to say that you have become very close to Mess Manager Shukla. I said that I have no concern with anyone. They started abusing me. I told them not to abuse. Thereupon they surrounded me and assaulted me with fists and kicks and beat me with red shoes. Constable No. 825 Parmhansh Singh and Constable No. 713 Achyutanand Mishra saved me and witnessed the incident. Afterwards the accused persons ran away taking their belongings. My report be written and action be taken. Constable No. 614 Gajendra Singh District Gonda Dated 19.02.1989.”

5. Upon completion of the investigation chargesheet came to be filed for the offences enumerated above against the appellant and other co-accused. The filing of the chargesheet culminated in Criminal Case No. 545 of 1991 pending as on date in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Railway) Allahabad.

6. We take notice of the fact that two of the co-accused passed away during the pendency of the proceedings and the other two co-accused were put to trial and came to be acquitted by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Railway) Allahabad vide judgment and order dated 01.02.2023. We are informed that the two co-accused were acquitted as prosecution was unable to lead any evidence in support of the charge.

7. The judgment acquitting the two co-accused in Case No. 545A of 1991 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Railway), Allahabad is on record. It is very much relevant to reproduce some part of the judgment which reads thus:

“Charges under Section 147, 323, 504 IPC and Section 120 Railway Act were framed against the accused persons. The accused denied the charges and claimed for trial.

The prosecution was granted sufficient and long opportunity by.

This Court to produce evidence. However, the present case has remained pending in this Court since the year 1991, i.e. for about 33 years, and this file was one of the oldest pending records of this Court, but the prosecut