Satya Pal vs Union Territory, Chandigarh

V.K. Bali, J. (Oral)

Satya Pal through present petition filed by him under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeks quashing of the complaint under Section 7 read with section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Wood Adulteration Act, 1954 and for setting aside all the consequential proceedings i.e. order of charge etc.

Undisputed facts giving rise to this petition reveal that sample of bread was taken from the shop of the petitioner and as per report of the Public Analyst the same was found to be containing two rat drops. The sample was taken on 26.2.1985. The accusedpetitioner faced trial for a period of seven years and the same was being tried as summon case. It is after a period of seven years that the complaint was treated as a warrant case resulting into de novo trial. By now a period of ten years have gone by and the petitioner is going through agonising trial all this while. It is maril on the ground of such great delay that the present petition has been filed for quashing the complaint. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of this Court in Tek Chand v. State of Haryana, 1993(3) Recent Criminal Reports 359 to contend that if the trial is delayed for such a long time as in this case, it in itself would amount to an abuse of process of Court. Facts of Tek Chand''s case (supra) was that a sample of milk was taken in the said case which was found to be adulterated. Procedure of warrant trial was followed by Court and after four years procedure of summary trial was followed. Considering the long delay in the matter, complaint against the petitioner in the said case was quashed. Following the dictum of Tek Chand''s case (supra) and considering that the petitioner has already gone through the agonising trial of nearly ten years by now, the complaint against him is quashed.