DURGA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. To impart justice is the sovereign function of the State, Mr Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his client was arrested in the year 1987 and the case could not proceed even upto the stage of charge upto 31st Aug., 1989. He further submits that the State has failed to perform the sovereign function to impart justice without delay and thus Violated the (illegible) the Constitution of India. Mr. Gupta, further submits that inspite of the repeated directions without the fault, of the petitioner, the justice has been delayed and his client is behind the bars for more than 2 years.

(2.) Mrs. Jain, appearing on behalf of the State, was reluctant to appear in this case as she has no instruction. However, looking to the fact that the court may pass the structure against the State, she appeared with reluctance in the case without any paper whatsoever and submitted that the accused was absconding and some eye witnesses are still to be examined and the bad should not be granted to the accused applicant.

(3.) Life and liberty is the fundamental right of the citizen. A person cannot be put behind the bar without trial means without speedy trial. Delayed trial is not a real trial. Delay defeats the justice and delay over-rides the fundamental rights of the citizen. The question before me is not of an individual but also of the society as a whole. It is not a question of the disposal of the bail-application only but it attracts the provisions of Art. 21 of the Constitution of India. The fundamental right of the citizen has been infringed by not providing machinary for the speedy disposal of the case. The disposal of this bail-application will not dispose of the matter which is before this court, as such it is necessary to issue a notice to the Registrar, Rajasthan High Court to show cause as to why the proceedings remain pending upto 31st Aug., 1989 in spite of the fact that the accused is behind the bar. He should also explain the difficulty. High Court is facing an administration of justice and it is also the duty of the High Court to see that the people get the report of administration of justice. It is sad that the report has not yet been published for the last 10 years. The people has a right to ask the persons sitting on the bench to explain why the report has not yet been published and who is responsible for the same. People has a right to discuss and to suggest the remedial measures in the fountain of justice is suffering from cracks. Un-accountable persons should feel that they are accountable to the society and they cannot get the shelter of the accountability. It is a very sad affair that the State Government, is also not moving with the time and the P.P. is not provided due assistance in the matter of preparation of the case.