https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169910 The right to speedy trial under Article 21 was treated as part of life and liberty, but delay in investigation and trial will justify quashing only where it is shown to be so unfair and prejudicial that continuation of the prosecution would violate that right. On the facts discussed, the delay was not found wanton or oppressive, and the proper course was to secure an expeditious trial rather than terminate the proceedings. A default-bail order under the proviso to Section 167(2) CrPC was held to survive lapse of time, filing of the charge-sheet, or remand under Section 309(2), and it can be cancelled only through recognised legal grounds under Sections 437(5) or 439(2). en-us Fri, 19 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 May 2015 15:35:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169910 The right to speedy trial under Article 21 was treated as part of life and liberty, but delay in investigation and trial will justify quashing only where it is shown to be so unfair and prejudicial that continuation of the prosecution would violate that right. On the facts discussed, the delay was not found wanton or oppressive, and the proper course was to secure an expeditious trial rather than terminate the proceedings. A default-bail order under the proviso to Section 167(2) CrPC was held to survive lapse of time, filing of the charge-sheet, or remand under Section 309(2), and it can be cancelled only through recognised legal grounds under Sections 437(5) or 439(2). Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 19 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169910