KAILASH NARAIN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been preferred against the order dated 6.4.1994 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etawah.

(2.) THE fact is that by that order learned Magistrate framed charge against a firm M/s Kailash Narain Om Prakash at the stage of argument. From the record it appears that 'Chana Dal' (Gram) was stored at the factory of the said firm, sample was taken and on the analysis it was found to be adulterated and accordingly a complaint was lodged against the revisionist. Trial proceeded against the revisionist but at the time of argument learned Magistrate framed charge against the firm and called witnesses for cross-examination. This is the grievance of the revisionist.

(3.) 'The fixation of the outer limit of 7 years must not be misunderstood and misconstrued to mean that a delay of less than 7 years would not in any case amount to prejudice. Indeed, what is sought to be laid down in extreme outer limit whereafter grave prejudice to the accused must be presumed and the infraction of the constitutional right would be plainly established."