"Speedy trial is a right of both complainant and accused": Allahabad High Court directs trial courts for expeditious conclusion of cases
Court was hearing a plea to quash proceedings in a 24-year-old case filed alleging cheating and forgery in the elections of a society which were concluded in 1998.
;Expressing its anguish over unnecessary and baseless delay in conclusion of criminal proceedings pending before trial courts in the state, the Allahabad High Court recently observed that "speedy trial is a right not only of the complainant but accused persons also".
The bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery stressed that despite the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court for speedy trial in P. Ramachandra Rao vs. State of Karnataka (2002), the directions are not being followed in letter and spirit.
In view of the same, court directed the trial courts to undertake endeavour that every criminal proceedings shall be concluded expeditiously.
The court was hearing an application for quashing criminal proceedings in a case pending since 1998. Court observed that even after 24 years, the matter had reached only upto the stage of discharge application and there was no explanation for the same.
Moreover, court noted that evidently criminal proceedings initiated against the applicants were maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the applicants and still the proceedings were pending.
Therefore, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC, court quashed the case against the applicants.
However, court added that though it quashed the proceedings after 24 years, the suffering of accused persons/ applicants could not be compensated. In light of the same, court pushed the need for an expeditious conclusion of criminal proceedings.
Facts of the case:
A First Information Report was lodged under Sections 420, 467, and 468 IPC against the applicant Dr. Meraj Ali and another. Allegedly, the applicants had committed forgery and cheating in elections of a society, namely “All India Muslim and Rehabilitation Education Society, Aligarh".
The elections of the society were concluded in 1998 in which applicants and others were declared office bearers of Society. However, the persons who were defeated in the said election, initiated criminal proceedings against the applicants in 1999 alleging that the election was fraudulent wherein the presence of some of the members was wrongly shown and even the signatures of members were forged.
After the investigation, chargesheet was filed on November 18, 2000, and cognizance was also taken. Thereafter, the applicants filed an application for discharge under Section 239 CrPC on December 23, 2021, which had been rejected by means of the order dated March 9, 2022, against which, the applicants moved the high court.
Case Title: Dr. Meraj Ali And Another v. State of U.P. and Another