Cuttack: The Orissa High Court has quashed criminal proceedings under the Prevention of Corruption Act against several government offi cials in a vigilance case dating back to the nineties relating to the alleged embezzlement of Rs 1.50 lakh meant for the installation of shallow tube wells for small and marginal farmers in Jagatsinghpur district’s Raghunathpur block.
Setting aside the proceedings, Justice Aditya Kumar Mohapatra held that the extraordinary delay of more than three decades had rendered the continuation of the trial unjust and violative of the accused persons’ constitutional right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.
“An inordinate delay of more than three decades subverts the very purpose which the legislation seeks to achieve and affects not only the established right to speedy trial of the accused but also tarnishes the sanctity of the criminal process while eroding public faith in the administration of justice,” the Court observed.
The State Vigilance had registered an FIR February 2, 1993. However, the investigation took four years, with the charge sheet being fi led only June 30, 1997.
Cognisance of the offences was taken another four years later, June 30, 2001. The case was subsequently transferred to the Court of the Special Judge (Vigilance), Cuttack February 2, 2007. Despite the passage of 31 years since the registration of the FIR, no charges had been framed when the petition challenging the proceedings was filed in 2024.
Court records revealed that 17 of the 56 charge-sheeted persons had died during the pendency of the case. Justice Mohapatra noted that such prolonged and unexplained delay had caused grave prejudice to the accused.
“Any trial which proceeds on inordinate delays and crumbled evidentiary foundations cannot be described as a fair trial,” the Court said, adding that a criminal proceeding incapable of ensuring fairness must be brought to an end.
While acknowledging that the Prevention of Corruption Act is a special legislation enacted to curb corruption, the Court emphasised that the prosecution bears an even greater responsibility to conduct such cases diligently and ensure their expeditious conclusion.
Observing that the deaths of several accused persons and witnesses, coupled with the extraordinary delay, had severely undermined the possibility of a fair trial, the Court held that continuation of the proceedings would amount to an abuse of the judicial process.
“In the larger interests of justice,” Justice Mohapatra concluded the pending criminal proceedings against the accused government functionaries deserved to be quashed.
