Supreme Court allows appeal due to 11-year delay in naming appellant in prosecution; interim protection made absolute.

The SC allowed the appeal concerning the delay in naming the appellant in the prosecution complaint, noting the eleven-year gap between the initial ECIR registration and the appellant's naming in a supplementary complaint. Despite this delay, the appellant was not arrested. The SC also made the interim protection granted to the appellant on 24.03.2023 absolute, applying to him individually and as an Authorized Representative of the Faith Cricket Club. The appellant was directed to appear before the trial court, with any pending applications to be resolved accordingly.

---

---

Issues involved: Delay in naming the appellant in prosecution complaint and the grant of interim protection.

For the issue of delay in naming the appellant in the prosecution complaint, the Supreme Court noted that the ECIR was registered on 31.01.2011, while the prosecution complaint was registered on 29.06.2018, with the appellant not being named initially. However, in the supplementary complaint filed on 23.12.2022, the appellant was named. Despite this delay of eleven years, the appellant was not arrested. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal.

Regarding the grant of interim protection, the Court made the protection granted to the appellant on 24.03.2023 absolute. It was clarified that this protection applied to the appellant in his individual capacity and as an Authorized Representative of the Faith Cricket Club. However, the appellant was directed to appear before the trial court, and any pending application(s) were to be disposed of accordingly.

---