The right to a speedy trial includes pre-trial processes; excessive delay can lead to quashing of criminal proceedings if evidence is inadequate.

CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA, J.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

2. The present petition is being filed on behalf of the petitioner for quashing of FIR bearing Charpokhari P.S. Case No. 93 of 2009 registered under sections 419, 420, 409, 467, 468, 471 and 477A of Indian Penal Code dated 31.08.2009 against the petitioner and other co-accused persons.

3. The prosecution case in brief, as it appears from the letter dated 24.08.2009 issued by the District Magistrate, Bhojpur, Ara which is the basis of FIR that petitioner along-with other co-accused persons, defalcated money allocated under the Indira Awas Yojana to the respective beneficiaries. It is also alleged that illegal commissions were received from the beneficiaries and passbooks of some of the beneficiaries were illegally confiscated by the Mukhiya Pati and other members of Panchayat Samiti in lieu of illegal gratification. Further, it is alleged that co-accused persons namely, Nandlal, Kaushal Yadav and Jai Shankar Yadav @ Jata Shankar Yadav forcefully took away the bank passbook of some of the beneficiaries and demanded Rs. 5000/- for each passbook as illegal gratification for its returning to the holders.

4. Mr. Rana Vikram Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that despite of lodging of an FIR in the year 2009, the investigation is still pending against the petitioner, who was working as Circle Officer cum Block Development Officer, Garahani Block, district Bhojpur at Ara at the relevant point of time. It is submitted that from the perusal of the inquiry report dated 12.0 2009, which is the basis of present the FIR dated 24.08.2009 prepared by Deputy Commissioner, Bhojpur (Ara), it can safely gathered that no direct allegation appears available to implicate the petitioner for the alleged offences. It is submitted that mere as petitioner was posted at relevant point of time, she was implicated with the present case. The statements of affected/ suffered beneficiaries were recorded during the course of investigation, where they categorically stated that the petitioner never demanded any gratification from any of them. It is further submitted by Mr. Singh that the aforesaid report categorically stated that one Jai Shankar Yadav @ Jata Shankar Yadav, demanded and received illegal gratification in the name of Block Development Officer and Block Nazir. It is submitted that most of the beneficiaries received grant of Rs. 24,000/- in a time bound manner, as some of the beneficiaries suffered at the hands of members of the panchayat samiti and mukhya pati for non-payment of illegal gratification as asked by them, for which, petitioner cannot be said liable. It is also pointed out that letter no. 143 dated 18.05.2009, clearly states that the process of distribution of the passbook to the beneficiaries was already completed by petitioner. Investigation also suggests that grant of money has already been allocated to the rightful beneficiaries, but despite the same, petitioner was implicated and as such she is facing the trauma of criminal trial since last 19 years. It is further submitted by learned counsel that departmental proceedings initiated against the petitioner was completed and final order of the same was issued by the General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, vide memo no. 8 dated 20.01.2015, wherein the petitioner was acquitted from all the charges, further confirming her innocence in the present matter. It is submitted that, however, the petitioner was found negligent in supervision of her work and for same punishment of “censor” was passed against her, which is a minor punishment in ter