Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CHITTARANJAN DASH
Doaba Industrial & Trading Company Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Republic of India, Central Bureau of Investigation, BBSR – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background and allegations in criminal case. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. right to a speedy trial infringement arguments. (Para 3) |
| 3. prosecution's response to delay claims. (Para 4) |
| 4. analysis of trial delay responsibility. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 5. court's directive for expedited proceedings. (Para 7 , 8) |
JUDGMENT :
CHITTARANJAN DASH, J.
1. By means of this application, the Petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. RC 52(S)/94 registered by Opposite Party No.1-CBI, along with all consequential actions/proceedings arising therefrom, including Charge-Sheet No.4 dated 31.03.1995 and the ongoing criminal trial/proceedings against Petitioner No.1 in S.P.E. No.32 of 1994 pending before the court of the Special Judge, C.J.M. (CBI), Bhubaneswar.
2. The background facts, as briefly stated, are that Petitioner No.1, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, was implicated in connection with the aforesaid FIR and Charge-Sheet No.4 dated 31.03.1995 on the allegation that, while functioning as the Clearing and Forwarding Agent of M/s. National Aluminium Company (hereinafter “NALCO”), a public sector undertaking, it had been entrusted with handling export consignments at Paradip Port pursuant to a tende
The constitutional right to a speedy trial does not automatically lead to quashing proceedings unless the delay is solely attributable to the prosecution, especially if the accused contributed to the....
Delay in criminal proceedings may constitute an infringement of the right to a speedy trial under Article 21, warranting quashing of charges if allegations do not establish a prima facie case.
The right to a speedy trial is constitutionally protected under Article 21, and unreasonable delays, particularly when not caused by the accused, can warrant quashing ongoing criminal proceedings.
The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution is fundamental, and inordinate delays in criminal proceedings can lead to quashing of the prosecution.
The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution is fundamental and must be upheld, with inordinate delays in prosecution warranting quashing of proceedings.
The court quashed criminal proceedings due to the absence of a prima facie case and inordinate delay in investigation, which violated the Petitioners' right to a speedy trial.
Right to speedy trial flows from Article 21 of Constitution of India. Court can neither be a mute spectator to whims and fancies of investigating agency nor be a party to it.
: While speedy trial is a fundamental right of every accused but then it is not possible to lay down any hard and fast rule that delay in holding trial would always result in quashing of criminal pro....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
