Right to speedy trial-whether outer limit for trial can be fixed?

Niranjan Hemchandra Sashittal v. State of Maharashtra, (2013) 4 SCC 642
Criminal Law
Public Accountability, Vigilance and Prevention of Corruption
Right to speedy trial - Availability of, in corruption cases - Protracted criminal proceedings - Quashing of, on ground of
delay - When not warranted - Factors to be considered - Held, factors like social justice, rule of law and purpose of
enactment concerned to secure and spread deterrent message have to be weighed and balanced - Reiterated, no outer
limit for trial can be fixed -
Corruption corrodes marrows of economy and causes incurable concavity in Rule of Law and
good governance - If corruption cases are allowed to be quashed only on ground of delay, it may garner and pave way to
anarchism - Appellant was found in possession of disproportionate assets worth Rs 33.44 lakhs - Trial pending since
1993 with only part examination of PW 1 (IO) recorded - Accused himself chiefly to blame for delaying and protracting
trial - Held, when delay is caused due to dilatory tactics adopted by accused, he cannot advance a plea that delay in trial
has caused colossal hardship and agony warranting quashment of entire criminal proceeding - Hence, in present case,
balance tilts in favour of continuing proceedings against petitioners - Trial court directed to conclude proceedings against
appellant-accused expeditiously, 
Public Accountability, Vigilance and Prevention of Corruption
Long drawn out/delayed trial - Conduct of accused in delaying trial - Impermissibility of quashment in such a case -
When accused himself causes delay, held, accused cannot advance plea that delay in trial caused colossal hardship and
agony warranting quashment of entire proceedings - In instant case, considering that accused was charged with abusing
his official position and acquiring assets worth Rs 33.44 lakhs in year 1986 disproportionate to his known source of
income, held, quashment of criminal proceedings is not justifiable, 
Constitution of India
Art. 21 - Right to speedy trial - Scope of - Quashment on ground of delay - Factors to be considered - Summarised - No
time-limit can be prescribed for trial of any offence - Reiterated, following seven-Judge Bench ruling in P. Ramachandra
Rao, (2002) 4 SCC 578, each case must be left to be decided on its own facts and right to speedy trial does not become
illusory when a time-limit is not fixed - It is neither advisable nor practicable to fix any time-limit for trial of offences,

Public Accountability, Vigilance and Prevention of Corruption
Need to eradicate - Reasons for - Held, corruption mothers disorder, destroys societal will to progress, accelerates
undeserved ambitions, kills conscience, paralyses economic growth, corrodes sense of civility and mars marrows of
governance,

Print Page