Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 18 (0.43 seconds)

S.G. Nain vs Union Of India on 2 August, 1991

3. The Ld. counsel of the petitioner submitted that the cognizance of the offence was taken by the Ld. trial court long back in the year 1994, however Crl.M.C. 2592/2011 Page 2 of 8 the charges are yet to be framed against the petitioner. The matter has been pending for 17 years now in the trial Court, however, the delay cannot be attributed to the petitioner. It is further submitted that inordinate delay in the trial amounts to an infringement of the fundamental right of the petitioner to a speedy trial and this Court ought to quash the FIR qua the petitioner. The counsel relies upon various judgments of this court as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court namely Kamaldin & Ors v. CBI 2012, (1) JCC 51, Karambir Singh v. CBI, 2012 (1) JCC 12, A.R. Antulay & Ors. v. R.S. Nayak & Ors, 1992 (1) SCC 225, Madheshwardhari Singh & Anr. v. State of Bihar, AIR 1986 Patna 324, Vakil Prasad Singh v. State of Bihar, 2009 (2) JCC 855, S.G. Nain v. UOI, AIR 1992 SC 603, Bishwanath Prasad Singh v. State, 1994 CriLJ 242 SC & T.J. Stephen v. M/s Parle Bottling, AIR 1988 SC 994 to contend that the petitioner ought not to bear the agony of a protracted trial and has prayed for quashing of the FIR qua the petitioner.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 18 - Full Document
1   2 Next