Right to speedy trial can justify quashing criminal proceedings where unexplained delay and weak prosecution material make continuation unjustified.

Prolonged criminal prosecution may be terminated where inordinate, unexplained delay prejudices the accused and amounts to abuse of process. Here, the proceedings had remained pending for about 21 years, with delay at each stage attributable to the prosecution side and no material shown to support continued prosecution. As the allegations were not backed by a sufficient witness list or supporting evidence, and the accused had not caused the pendency, continuation was found unjustified. Applying the Article 21 right to speedy trial, the charge sheet and criminal proceedings were quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the criminal proceedings and charge sheet were liable to be quashed on the ground of inordinate delay resulting in violation of the right to speedy trial and abuse of process of law.

Analysis: The proceedings had remained pending for about 21 years, with the complaint, final report, and further investigation each followed by substantial unexplained delay. The allegations did not disclose material evidence sufficient to sustain the charges, and no witness list or other supporting material was shown to justify continuation of the prosecution. The delay was attributable to the prosecution side and the complainant, while the accused had not contributed to the prolonged pendency. In view of the settled principle that the right to speedy trial forms part of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and that oppressive, unwarranted delay may justify termination of criminal proceedings, continuation of the case was found to be unjustified.

Conclusion: The charge sheet and criminal proceedings were quashed, and the petition was allowed.

---