LAWS(P&H)-1991-1-78

SHANGARA SINGH ALIAS KAKKU Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

Decided On January 25, 1991
Shangara Singh Alias Kakku Appellant
V/S
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHINGARA Singh accused-petitioner has filed this petitition for quashment of the trial proceedings pending against him in a case for offence under section 61(1) of the Punjab Excise Act involving the possession of 500 bottles of illicit liquor by the accused petitioner and his two co-accused Jasbir Singh and Phuman Singh on 31-7-1983. It is contended that the challan was put in Court on 15-12-1983 and the charge was framed on 9-3-1984, but so far there is no progress in the trial except that one witness had been examined after the filing of this petition.

(2.) IN the return filed by Shri Bira Singh, SHO P.S. Makhu, it is averred that Shingara Singh accused absconded during the pendency of the trial for a sufficiently long period. It is further averred that thereafter Phuman Singh accused absconded on 16.8.1990. Then Jasbir Singh co-accused absconded and it was ultimately found that he had since died. Thereafter the case continued to be adjourned for verifying the factum of death of Jasbir Singh and dropping the proceedings against him. Phuman Singh co-accused of the petitioner was then reported to be in custody of the police of Amritsar District and production warrants were issued but the Superintendent, Nabha Jail failed to produce Phuman Singh and the reminders were still beings issued for his production. It is further stated that Shingara Singh also absented himself and was ordered to be summoned through non bailable warrants for 15-5-1990.

(3.) NO doubt, it is a case where ordinarily the trial should have been quashed on the ground of delay of six years in disposing of the case after the framing of the charge, yet all the same, the accused petitioner and his co-accused having contributed towards the delay, no such order is called for at this stage. The trial Court is, however directed to dispose of the case finally within six months of this order and, if need be, by separating the proceedings against Shingara Singh accused-petitioner from that of his co-accused Phuman Singh.