HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD CRIMINAL PETITION No.6217 of 2009 DATED:12.08.2009 Between: Meer Abrar Hussain .. Petitioner And The State of A.P., rep. By the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad, through Station House Officer, III Town (L&O) Police Station, Visakhapatnam and others .. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD CRIMINAL PETITION No.6217 of 2009 ORDER: Heard Sri K.Krishna Kishore, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri A.Ramesh, learned counsel representing the learned Public Prosecutor, who entered appearance for the first respondent. No notice is being ordered to the respondents 2 to 4, as the matter is being disposed of at the stage of admission and the order being passed herein no way touches upon the rights and interests of respondents 2 to 4. The petitioner is facing prosecution in C.C.No.1407 of 2008 under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with his alleged promises to the respondents 2 to 4 in respect of overseas employment and breach of such promises allegedly with dishonest intention. While the merits of the allegations against the petitioner are for the trial Court to go into on the evidence placed before it, the grievance of the petitioner is about there being no further investigation before filing the charge sheet after the statements of witnesses were recorded on 11.03.2004 and that filing of the charge sheet after five years violates his fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. However the adequacy of the material placed before the Court by the investigating officer is for the trial Court to appreciate and it is well settled that in any proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, this Court cannot go into the reliability or sufficiency or genuineness of the materials relied on by the prosecution. Insofar as the delay in filing the charge sheet is concerned, while there is no question of bar of limitation under the relevant provisions under the Code of Criminal Procedure, the proceedings legally initiated cannot be quashed solely on the ground of delay without proof of such circumstances as would make the further continuance of the criminal proceedings violate the fundamental rights of the petitioner more particularly Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The factual scenario does not appear to require taking recourse to such extreme action. Sri K.Krishna Kishore requested that the trial Court may be directed to dispose of the case expeditiously as the pendency of the criminal proceedings is casting a shadow on the personal life and career of the petitioner. Such a direction can be reasonably given under the circumstances. Therefore, while the Criminal Petition is dismissed, the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam is directed to try and dispose of C.C.No.1407 of 2008 on his file on merits in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible at any rate within six months from the date of receipt of the orders of this Court. _____________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J 12th August 2009 KH