https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184470 Delay in criminal proceedings does not, by itself, justify quashing where the accused have materially contributed to the delay through challenges and non-appearance. In a warrant case instituted otherwise than on a police report, discharge after evidence under Section 244 CrPC is permissible only when the magistrate records reasons that no case is made out which, if unrebutted, would warrant conviction, or that the charge is groundless at the earlier stage. The discussion emphasises that proceedings under the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act were treated as serious, and that the statutory discharge standard must be applied rather than resting solely on delay. en-us Fri, 19 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 09 Jul 2016 12:28:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184470 Delay in criminal proceedings does not, by itself, justify quashing where the accused have materially contributed to the delay through challenges and non-appearance. In a warrant case instituted otherwise than on a police report, discharge after evidence under Section 244 CrPC is permissible only when the magistrate records reasons that no case is made out which, if unrebutted, would warrant conviction, or that the charge is groundless at the earlier stage. The discussion emphasises that proceedings under the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act were treated as serious, and that the statutory discharge standard must be applied rather than resting solely on delay. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 19 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184470