SURESH GOVIND NAIK Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was arrested for investigation purpose on the basis of an F. I. R. filed by the Regional Manager, Union bank of India against Branch Manager of its Wadia Branch. A Criminal Case was registered after the investigation was over and a charge-sheet was filed in the Court in 1987. It is the grievance of the petitioner that 17 years have clasped after the arrest of the petitioner and that more than 16 years have passed after the filing of the charge-sheet and registration of the case, yet charges have not been framed. The inorginate delay in conducting the trial has caused great hardship to the petitioner. The said delay is oppressive and has resulted in violation of the petitioner's fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) WE have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner. He has filed in this Court Roznamaof the trial Court. The Roznamaindicates that the charge-sheet was filed on 28-3-1987. Thereafter, the proceedings seem to have stated from 3-11-1997. The learned Counsel made grievance firstly about the time gap between 1987 to 1997. Mr. Lambey for the respondents contended that during this time all corruption cases involving Bank Officers, were kept in abeyance because the Supreme Court was considering the question whether a bank officer is a public servant within the meaning of the Prevention of corruption Act. It was only after the Supreme Court delivered its judgment on that issue that all the cases were reopened.

(3.) IN view of this, in our opinion no grievance can be made of the time gap between 1987 to 1997. It was argued by the learned Counsel that in any case the further delay is oppressive and hence this Court should dismiss the present case on the ground that the respondents have violated the fundamental right of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.