Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shri Mahil Griha Udyog Lijjat Papad vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 5 September, 2017
MCRC-1101-2017
(SHRI MAHIL GRIHA UDYOG LIJJAT PAPAD Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
05-09-2017
Shri Aditya Sanghi, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Aditya Jain, learned Deputy GA for respondent/State.
Heard the parties.
Counsel for the respondent submits that the case diary is not available today.
This petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court and to quash the proceeding in Criminal Complaint Case No.719/2006, pending before the learned JMFC, Shahdol.
The facts requisite for disposal of this petition are that, the petitioner/Shri Mahila Griha Udyog Lijjat Papad, through its Director, Smt. Pushpa Beri manufacturer of the food material and Prakash Chandra Jain, Ganesh Prasad the owner of the shop, have been prosecuted for offence under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.
It is also observed from the order sheet dated 26/06/2014 that one of the accused Motilal Jain has been died. As the complainant/ J.P. Verma filed the complaint as the Food Inspector. Order sheet dated 24/09/2016 show that the case is pending since last 25 years and requisition has been made for summoning of the witnesses through the Superintendent of Police which indicates that the prosecution has not examined any witness till date.
Needless to say that, the complaint case is pending since 1992 which almost 25 years since it is an institution.
This Court in the case of Shri Mahila Grih Udyog Lijjat Papad Vs. State of M.P. in M.Cr.C. No.11473/2011 following the law laid down in B.G. Subramaniam and others Vs. State of M.P. in M.Cr.C. No.3908/2011 dismissed the criminal complaint case No.2163/1997 vide order dated 06/03/2013 which was pending for last 11 years. The present complaint is pending since last 25 years.
Analyzing Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that the speedy trial of a criminal case is a right of the accused. The Supreme Court propounded that fair, just and reasonable procedure implicit in Article 21 and is also reflected in Section 309 of Cr.P.C., This right comprehends all stages viz. investigation, inquiry, trial, appeal, revision and retrial. Thus, it is mandate of the Constitution that proceedings must be concluded with reasonable despatch, if there is delay, burden lies on the prosecution to justify and explain the delay.
In the case of Girish Bhai Dahyabhai Shah Vs. CC Jani & another reported as 2009 (15) SCC 64, while disposing of a matter under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the Hon'ble Apex Court has quahsed the prosecution in view of the delay in filing of the complaint, the accused was deprived of his right under Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.
Keeping in view the circumstances prevailing in the case and the case law regarding speedy trial, the earlier order dated 06/03/2013 show that the complaint is pending since last 25 years and no evidence has been recorded so far. It is deemed fit that the proceedings are liable to be quahsed on the point of delay.
Consequently, the petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. The proceeding of Criminal Complaint Case No.719/2006 pending before the learned JMFC, Shahdol is quashed. Bail bond of the petitioner is discharged.
(SUSHIL KUMAR PALO) JUDGE RS