- (1.) Through this Misc. petition under Section 482, Cr. P.C. the petitioners Champalal and Chelaram seek quashment of the proceedings pending against them in the Court of Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sojat under Section 7 read with 16, Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (in short 'the P. F. Act') in Cr. Case No. 384/88.
(2.) The facts leading to this petition may be stated as under :- A sample of 'Laddu' of ground-nut oil was collected from the petitioners on 31-8-1988 and a charge-sheet was submitted after completing the procedure on 24-11-1988. The Court summoned the petitioners for which the case was adjourned on twenty dates from 10-3-89 to 22-12-93 for over four years. Petitioners appeared on 22-2-94 and submitted an application under Section 13(2) of the P. F. Act. The Court passed orders on this application on 13-6-94 to call the sample. The sample was not received till 8-9-94. Ultimately the sample was sent to Central Food Laboratory on 17-9-94 and 7-11-94 was fixed for taking pre-charge evidence. The Food Inspector Mohanlal was examined on 20-7-95. The case was adjourned ten times for arguments on charge till 9-9-96. Charge was framed on 26-9-96 and witnesses No. 1 to 3 were summoned. P.W. 1 Mohanlal and P.W. 2 Ghevar Puri were examined, but the case continued to be adjourned for examination of third witness Munnaram till 30-3-99. On the next date i.e. 30-4-99 Munna Ram did not attend the Court and bailable warrants were ordered to be issued to procure his attendance. These proceedings show that the case is pending for recording the prosecution evidence.
(3.) Mr. Suresh Kumbhat, learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners are attending the Court regularly for the last over 11 years and in that process they have suffered lot of physical and mental harassment and also loss of money. The protracted trial in the instant case violates the right of the petitioners for speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the proceedings against the petitioners deserve to be quashed in the interest of justice.;