https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300555 The right to speedy trial under Article 21 is a facet of constitutional fairness and must be assessed on the totality of circumstances, including the length and reasons for delay, prejudice, and the conduct of the parties. No universal outer time-limit can be fixed for quashing criminal proceedings solely because trial has remained pending for a long period, and quashing is not automatic in every delayed prosecution. On the facts stated, the post-1991 delay was mainly attributable to the accused, and the record did not show oppressive prosecution or prejudice sufficient to justify quashing. The challenge based on denial of speedy trial therefore failed. en-us Fri, 17 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 Feb 2022 11:58:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300555 The right to speedy trial under Article 21 is a facet of constitutional fairness and must be assessed on the totality of circumstances, including the length and reasons for delay, prejudice, and the conduct of the parties. No universal outer time-limit can be fixed for quashing criminal proceedings solely because trial has remained pending for a long period, and quashing is not automatic in every delayed prosecution. On the facts stated, the post-1991 delay was mainly attributable to the accused, and the record did not show oppressive prosecution or prejudice sufficient to justify quashing. The challenge based on denial of speedy trial therefore failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 17 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300555