PANKAJ KUMAR MONDAL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application u/s 401 and Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the Criminal Proceeding being G.R Case No. 3852 of 2000 arising out of Hare Street P.S. Case No. 776 dtd. 24/11/2000 u/s 120B/420/467/468/471/1420 of IPC. where from arose charge sheet No. 476 of 2004 dtd. 20/11/2004 u/s 120B/420/467/468/471 of IPC which was initially in the court of Learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Calcutta which was subsequently transferred to the court of Learned Metropolitan Magistrate 5th Court Calcutta and is still pending therein.

(2.) In a nutshell the allegation levelled in the FIR was that during the petitioner's service as a Police Constable in the year 1993, he had submitted a school certificate where there was an alleged anomaly regarding his date of birth. For the alleged Act of 1983 a First Information Report was lodged in this case in the year 2000 and a charge sheet was submitted in 2004. Although, trial commenced in the year 2005, PW 1 was examined in 2006 and PW 2 was also examined in the same year. Thereafter one witness appeared in the year 2008since then no one appeared out of 11 charge sheeted witnesses. It is the case of the revisionist before this court that the petitioner had to face agony of pendency of Criminal Trial for an act alleged to be happened in the year 1983. It is the further case of the petitioner that inordinate delay has been caused in the Trial without being fault of the petitioner, thus the proceeding ought to be quashed.

(3.) Learned Advocate for the petitioner further submitted that FIR was lodged in the year 2000 and we are now in the year 2023, already 23 years has already been elapsed; trial has not been processed yet so, pendency of the Criminal Litigation has ruined the free living of the present petitioner. He has suffered immense mental agony due to such pendency of Criminal Trial. The approach of the prosecution in respect of the instant Criminal Case is to be looked into. The alleged date of commission is in the year 1983 for which after long 17 years. One FIR was lodged and thereafter 23 years has already been elapsed but no result has yet to get light of this world. He submitted that the pendency of the instant Criminal Proceeding is liable to be quashed because the constitutional right of speedy Criminal Trial of the litigant has been violated in this case.