The petition registered as Cr.
On 24.4.1987, the petitioner appeared before companyrt, applied for and obtained bail.
After service of numberice and appearance of the respondent, the Superintendent of Police, C.B.I., Patna was arrayed as second respondent.
On November 2, 1982, a case was registered against the petitioner regarding an offence under Section 5 2 read with Section 5 1 e of the prevention of Corruption Act Act 11 of 1947 .
A charge sheet was submitted on 30.8.1985 by the C.B.I. in which the alleged disproportionate assets of the petitioner as on 5.11.1982 amounted to Rs.
As regards the present case, the relevant part of the report reads as follows According to chargesheet there are as many as forty witnesses out of whom, the prosecution has examined till today only three witnesses.
W.J.C. No.
By order dated 6.1.1997.
thereafter I also directed the C.B.I. to produce witnesses.
The next date fixed in the case for production of witness by the prosecution is 6.1.97.
Three withnesses were examined by the prosecution till 1.6.1995.
No bailable warrant or numberbailable warrants companyld be obtained against the witnesses, as the trial companyrt always remained busy in other cases.
The Special Judge, C.B.I., South Bihar, Patna took companynisance of the offences on 14.11.1986 and issued summons fixing 2.12.1986 as the date for appearance.
The report companytains details of other pending cases.
it would number be out of place that myself joined as Special Judge only on 21.9.96.
The petitioner filed a writ petition in the high Court of Patna on 5.12.1995 praying inter alia for quashing the entire prosecution including the F.I.R. on the ground that more than 13 years had elapsed since the institution of the F.I.R. and thus the right of the petitioner to speedy trial was violated.
It is the said order which is challenged in this petition.
By order dated 9.12.1996.
We directed the Superintendent of Police to file a companynter affidavit explanatory to the remarks made by the Special Judge in his report with regard to the pendency of matters.
The charges were framed by the Special Judge on 4.3.1993.
However, the Prosecution has failed to examine any of the remaining witnesses.
Leave granted.
9.10.932.41 along with a list of 40 witnesses and 20 documents.
It is the said order which is challenged in this petition.
Thereafter 36 adjournments were given to the prosecution for examination of remaining witnesses.
The petition registered as Cr.
The report of the Special Judge dated 25.12.1996 has disclosed a shocking state of affairs.
There are as many as 52 cases ranging from 1975 to 1996 pending at the stage of evidence relating to C.B.I., South Bihar and 44 cases ranging from 1972 to 1992 relating to B.I. , North Bihar.
The petitioner filed a writ petition in the High Court of Patna on 5.12.1995 praying inter alia for quashing the entire prosecution including the F.I.R on the ground that more than 13 years had elapsed since the institution of the F.I.R and thus the right of the petitioner to speedy trial was violated.
a report was called for from the Special Judge as to the companydition of the present case as well as other cases similarly blocked up.
W.J.C. No.
809/95 was dismissed by the High Court on 7.12.1995 on the ground that the delay was due to the ract that there was only one Special Court of the C.B.I. functioning and a large number of cases were pending before it.
The last witness was examined on 3.9.93.
809/95 was dismissed by the High Court on 7.12.1995 on the ground that the delay was due to the fact that there was only one Special Court of the C.B.I. functioning and a large number of cases were pending before it.
