1994 Supreme(Raj) 561
Rajasthan High Court
Honble N.L. Tibrewal, J.
Kajod - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondents
S.B. Criminal Misc. IIIrd Bail Application No. 4979 of 1994
Decided On : December 23, 1994
Manoj Sharma, for Petitioner R.S. Agrawal, Addl. P.P. for the State
Headnote:(a) Constitution of India — Article 21 — Expendious trial is a constitutional mandate and a duty is cast to take criminal case according to the mandate — There are various provisions in Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and the General Rules (Criminal), 1979 which require disposel of case expeditiously. (Paras 2 to 5)(b) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 439 — Bail matter — In the present case the accused is in jail for the last 28 months and there seems no end of the trial — Bail allowed. Bail allowed ¦ (Para 8)
(2). General Rules (Criminal) 1979 and the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 also contain provisions for disposal of criminal trials with the greatest possible expedition. Rule 42 of General Rules (Criminal) 1979 provides that sessions cases should be disposed of with the greatest possible expedition. Then Rule-43 states that "once a sessions trial is opened the Sessions Judge shall see that it is disposed of in the same session and not adjourned to next session. The sessions cases shall be taken up day to day untill all the witnesses in attendance have been examined and discharged. The Sessions Judge shall take necessary steps to get the summons served on the witnesses in time and if necessary the Superintendent of Police of the district may be asked to make special efforts to secure the attendance of the witnesses. A sessions trial shall not be adjourned or postponed except in exceptional circumstances for reasons to be recorded in writing."
(3). The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 also contains the provisions for expeditious investigation and trial of criminal cases. Section-173 (1) of the Code provides that every investigation of a criminal case under Chapter-XI shall be completed without unnecessary delay. Then, under section-167, the maximum period of detention has been specified during investigation and there is a mandate that on the expiry of the said period (90 days or 60 days, as the case may be), the accused shall be released on bail, if he is prepared and does furnish bail.
(4). Section-309 (1) also states that in every inquiry or trial, the proceedings shall be held as expeditiously as possible and on commencement of the examination of witnesses, the same shall be continued day to day till all the witnesses in attendance have been examined. Sub-Sec. (2) provides to record reasons for postponement or adjournment of an enquiry or trial. Proviso of this section further lays down that no Magistrate shall remand the accused-person to custody under this provision for a term exceeding 15 days at a time. As per Section 230, the primary duty to produce the prosecution witnesses in Court for examination lies on the Prosecuting Agency and the Court may, on an- application, by it, issue any process for compelling the attendance of any witness or the production of any document or other thing.
(5). Thus, the mandate of the law is that criminal trials should be concluded with the greatest possible expedition and no adjournment should be granted unless it is considered reasonable by the concerned Court. Further, the trial should be continued day to day if examination of witnesses has begun and to examine all the witnesses in attendance. This is more so if the accused is in custody. For Magistrates there is a statutory direction not to remand an accused person to custody for a term exceeding 15 days at a time. All these provisions are in consonance with Article 21 of the Constitution.
(6). In the above back-ground the facts may be examined. The petitioner and other co-accused are facing trial under Section 302 or 302/149 IPC in Sessions Case No. 75/91 in the Court of Additional District & Sessions Judge, Bundi for an offence committed on April 26, 1991. Except the petitioner, all other accused are on bail. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and c