<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2008 (7) TMI 1062 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279134</link>
    <description>Unexplained and inordinate delay in criminal investigation and trial can justify quashing proceedings where continuation would amount to abuse of process or defeat the ends of justice. The right to speedy investigation and trial forms part of Article 21, and the court must assess the length and causes of delay, responsibility for delay, the nature of the accusation, and actual prejudice before balancing all circumstances. On the stated facts, the prolonged pendency was not attributable to the accused, no satisfactory explanation was offered, and the trial had not commenced for an extended period, so the constitutional right was held to be violated and the proceedings were quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Dec 2021 11:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=561316" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (7) TMI 1062 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279134</link>
      <description>Unexplained and inordinate delay in criminal investigation and trial can justify quashing proceedings where continuation would amount to abuse of process or defeat the ends of justice. The right to speedy investigation and trial forms part of Article 21, and the court must assess the length and causes of delay, responsibility for delay, the nature of the accusation, and actual prejudice before balancing all circumstances. On the stated facts, the prolonged pendency was not attributable to the accused, no satisfactory explanation was offered, and the trial had not commenced for an extended period, so the constitutional right was held to be violated and the proceedings were quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279134</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>