NANAK CHAND Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon 1998(1) R.C.R. 806 Madan Lal Vs. State of Haryana , 1990 (3) R.C.R. 302 : [1998(4) All India Criminal Law Reporter 207 (Pb. & Hry.)] Madheshwardhari Singh and another Vs. State of Bihar a Full Bench decision of Patna High Court and submits that it shall be transversity of justice if the accused is directed to face denovo trial when the impugned complaint is pending since 9.4.1983. There is merit in the submission raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. It has been held in Madheshwardhari Singh case (supra) as follows :

(2.) Relying upon the judgment of this court as well Full Bench decision of Patna High Court I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the provisions of Sec. 482 Criminal Procedure Code can be invoked. In fact the petitioner is suffering the agony of criminal proceedings since 1983. So much, so, after his conviction, which was recorded by the Magistrate on 13/14.1.1995, he filed an appeal and his contention was accepted by the Appellate Court vide order dated 3.2.1997. In the opinion of this court, the Appellate Court was not justified in remanding the case after a lapse of 14 years. A serious prejudice has already been caused to the petitioner. The Appellate Court should have straight way given the benefit of Art. 21 of the Constitution and acquitted the petitioner Nanak Chand instead of remanding the case.

(3.) Constitutional right of the petitioner has been violated. In these circumstances, I allow this petition and quash the complaint dated 9.4.1983 along with all the subsequent proceedings and directions are given to the learned Magistrate not to prosecute the petitioner. Petition allowed. Petition allowed.