TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (4) TMI 92
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act and also under Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947. The case has been filed otherwise than on police report and it is a warrant case. The petition filed by the petitioner in MP No. 1447 of 1983 for furnishing copies of the report of the Superintendent of Police and the First Information Report was dismissed and was confirmed by the High Court in Crl. R. C. No. 658 of 1983. There is no progress of the case even after the receipt of the case papers from the High Court and after a lapse of one and a half years, the trial started. In the year 1992, PW-1 alone was examined and in the year 1993, no witness was examined. In 1994, PWs 2 to 4 were examined and thereafter in the year ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....te the trial, and it is against the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It Is also submitted that most of the allegations are only against the second accused and the witnesses so far examined have not implicated or said anything implicating the petitioner, the third accused. According to the petitioner, the prosecution launched against him is only an abuse of process of the court and is in violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and therefore, the proceedings against him are liable to be quashed. 4.The learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI cases produced a copy of the diary extract of this case and submitted that the delay in completing the trial was not caused entirely by the pros....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt fact. The prosecution should not be allowed to become a persecution. But when does the prosecution become persecution, again depends upon the facts of a given case." 6.It is important to notice in this case that already 19 witnesses have been examined and only two more witnesses are yet to be examined on the side of the prosecution for framing charge against the petitioner and others. It is true after framing the charge, the accused persons have a right to cross-examine the witnesses, if they desire and it will take some time to finish the trial. The right to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses is a right conferred on every citizen and accused and it is for him to use that right or not and making accusation against the prosecution....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Supreme Court itself and the matter has been referred to a Constitution Bench. In paragraphs 4 and 5 of the said decision, we find the following observations : 4. The question is whether the earlier judgments of this Court, principally, in Common Cause v. Union of India [1996 (4) SCC 33], Common Cause v. Union of India [1996 (6) SCC 775], Raj Deo Sharma v. State of Bihar [1999 (7) SCC 604], would apply to prosecutions under the Prevention of Corruption Act and other economic offences. 5. Having perused the judgments aforementioned, we are of the view that these appeals should be heard by a Constitution Bench. We take this view because we think that it may be necessary to synthesis the various guidelines and directions issued in these....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t has been held in paragraph 4, by the Supreme Court as follows : - "4. We do not consider it necessary to narrate the detailed facts leading to the present appeals except to state that the trial in the pending cases has been unduly protracted due to various causes. It is no doubt regrettable feature, but having regard to the nature of the allegations made and the availability of evidence in support of the prosecution, it is not expedient to terminate the proceedings at this stage, on account of lapse of time alone, by invoking the inherent power of the court. We think that the circumstances of the case only call for appropriate directions for the expeditious disposal of the pending proceedings and the law has to be allowed to take its o....