LAWS(SC)-2023-3-120

MOHD MUSLIM @ HUSSAIN Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

Decided On March 28, 2023
Mohd Muslim @ Hussain Appellant
V/S
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Special leave granted. With consent of counsel for parties, the appeal was heard finally.

(2.) Long back, in Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secy., State of Bihar, [1979] 3 SCR 1276: (1980) 1 SCC 81 this court had declared that the right to speedy trial of offenders facing criminal charges is "implicit in the broad sweep and content of Article 21 as interpreted by this Court". Remarking that a valid procedure under Article 21 is one which contains a procedure that is "reasonable, fair and just" it was held that:

(3.) These observations have resonated, time and again, in several judgments, such as Kadra Pahadiya & Ors. v. State of Bihar, (1981) 3 SCC 671 and Abdul Rehman Antulay v. R.S. Nayak, [1991] Supp. 3 SCR 325: (1992) 1 SCC 225; in the latter the court re-emphasized the right to speedy trial, and further held that an accused, facing prolonged trial, has no option: