S.C. Mital, J. - (1.) The petitioner has prayed in this petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. that the proceedings pending in the Court of Addl. Chief judicial Magistrate, Sojat City in Crl. Case No. 126/85 may be quashed in the interest of justice on the ground of extra-ordinary delay in trial. The petitioner's contention is that his right to speedy trial, now considered as a fundamental right, has been infringed and further continuation of the proceedings amounts to abuse of process of law.
(2.) The Crl. Case No. 126/85 under section 7 r/w 16 Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short 'the PFA) was registered on 16.7.1985 on the basis,of the sample taken by the food inspector on 14.10.1984. The petitioner-accused appeared in the Court on 9.1.1986 and requested to send the sample to Central Food Laboratory but it was not sent on ten dates upto 17.2.1988. However, the sample was sent to Gaziabad instead of directly sending it to Calcutta. Therefore, it was again sent to Calcutta and the report was received on 14.3.1989. Thereafter the witnesses were summoned but no witness was present in the Court till 16.11.1994 i.e. for about five years. At last, one witness Sanwal Singh was present on 22.11.1994 but he did not bring with him some original record and his statements could not be recorded. Second witness was present on 6.4.1995 and the statement of Sanwal Singh were incomplete. Again Sanwal Singh did not attend the Court on several dates upto 22.4.1998. Ultimately, Sanwal Singh was examined on 20.6.1998 and the case was adjourned for hearing the arguments for charge which was framed on 15.5.1999. Third witness was examined on 30.7.1999 but other witnesses were not present. The trial Court is now summoning the witnesses again and the prosecution evidence is still not complete. These facts are revealed from the certified copy of the order-sheets fled by the petitioner. Thus the prosecution has not produced evidence during these long period of 15 years.
(3.) It is vehemently contended that the petitioner is regularly attending the Court and in that process, has undergone all sorts of physical and mental harassment as well as loss of money. The fundamental right of the petitioner of speedy trial has been violated, so the proceedings of the said criminal case should be quashed in the interest of justice and also to prevent the abuse of the process of law. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the petition and prayed that the prosecution is not responsible for the delay. Therefore, learned trial Court be directed to finish the trial within a specified time frame.;