https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46895 The right to speedy trial under Article 21 is not subject to any rigid outer time-limit; courts must apply a fact-specific balancing test drawn from P. Ramachandra Rao and A.R. Antulay, considering the nature of the offence, number of accused and witnesses, responsibility for delay, and systemic constraints. Applied to the pending criminal complaint, the Court noted that the prolonged pre-charge evidence stage was not attributable to the prosecution alone and that the matter involved an economic offence. Quashing was therefore not justified, and the complaint was allowed to continue with directions for expeditious disposal by the trial court. en-us Fri, 25 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Jul 2010 15:29:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46895 The right to speedy trial under Article 21 is not subject to any rigid outer time-limit; courts must apply a fact-specific balancing test drawn from P. Ramachandra Rao and A.R. Antulay, considering the nature of the offence, number of accused and witnesses, responsibility for delay, and systemic constraints. Applied to the pending criminal complaint, the Court noted that the prolonged pre-charge evidence stage was not attributable to the prosecution alone and that the matter involved an economic offence. Quashing was therefore not justified, and the complaint was allowed to continue with directions for expeditious disposal by the trial court. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 25 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46895