Locus standi in criminal proceedings bars unrelated third parties from seeking Section 482 directions for expeditious trial.

A third party unconnected with the criminal prosecution had no locus standi to invoke Section 482 CrPC for directions on expeditious trial. The Court reiterated that criminal proceedings are ordinarily to be challenged or pursued by the parties to the case, not by strangers under the guise of public interest. Although expeditious disposal of corruption trials is generally desirable and appropriate directions may be issued in suitable cases, such relief was not ordinarily maintainable at the instance of an unrelated person. The High Court's direction for expeditious trial was therefore set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether a third party unconnected with the criminal prosecution had locus standi to invoke Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to seek directions for expeditious trial.

Analysis: The proceeding was initiated by a person who was neither the accused nor otherwise connected with the prosecution. The Court reiterated that criminal proceedings are to be challenged by the parties to the case and not by strangers under the guise of public interest. Though expeditious disposal of corruption trials is ordinarily desirable and the High Court can in appropriate cases issue such directions, an application at the instance of an unrelated third party was held to be not ordinarily entertainable.

Conclusion: The third party had no locus standi to maintain the application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the High Court's order directing expeditious trial was set aside.

---