QUASHING A criminal case pending trial in Prayagraj since 1991, the Supreme Court, while emphasising that “quick justice is sine qua non of Article 21 of the Constitution”, observed that courts do not bother to follow guidelines laid down by it repeatedly on the right to speedy trial.

Citing nearly 20 cases, including from foreign jurisdictions in which the right to speedy trial was emphasised, a bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and Ujjal Bhuyan said in its order: “We wonder how many such guidelines as referred to above may have been issued by this court over a period of at least two decades. Guidelines just remain on paper; guidelines do not work fully. The reason for the same is also very simple. No court bothers to follow the guidelines. They do not follow because there is no accountability. No one is made answerable for the same.”

The court was hearing an appeal filed by accused Kailash Chandra Kapri, who was a constable with the Uttar Pradesh police in 1991, challenging a February 23, 2026 Allahabad High Court order refusing to quash a case against him.

Kapri faced charges under IPC and the Railways Act. The FIR registered with GRP, Rambagh Police Station, Allahabad, in 1989, was pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Railway), Prayagraj, since 1991.

Kapri’s counsel Advocates Rajesh G Inamdar and Shashwat Anand pointed out that of the five accused chargesheeted in the case, two had passed away and the other two were acquitted in February 2023 as the prosecution was unable to give any evidence in support of the charges.

In its April 29 order which was made available on Tuesday, the SC said: “It appears on plain reading of the FIR and the other materials on record that on the date of the alleged incident five police constables posted with the GRP Rambagh fought with each other on a very trivial issue. This incident occurred in the police mess relating to food.”

The bench also noted that Kapri was 22 years old when the FIR was registered in 1991 and is now 59. He is currently a Head Constable with the Local Intelligence Unit in Uttarakhand Police and is on the verge of retirement.

The Uttar Pradesh government said proceedings against Kapri could not continue as he was transferred to Uttarakhand after bifurcation of the state in 2000 and summons could not be served upon him.

The court said, “The case at hand is one of causing simple hurt and criminal intimidation. It is, as such, neither a grave or heinous offence nor an offence against the community as such, though all criminal offences are crimes against society. Having regard to the nature of offence, there is enormous delay in proceeding with the criminal prosecution…”

“Quick justice is sine qua non of Article 21 of the Constitution. Keeping a person in suspended animation for 35 years and that too a public servant without any cause at all — and none was indicted before the High court or before us — gone by with the spirit of procedure established by law. In that view of the matter it is just unfair and in accordance with equity to direct that the trial or prosecution of the appellant to proceed no further. We do so accordingly,” the court said.

Though it quashed the case against Kapri, the SC decided to keep the matter pending saying: “We firmly believe that we should carry this matter further to make this right of an accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution more meaningful and real.”

It asked the Registrar General of the Allahabad High Court to furnish information including on the criminal cases pending before the courts of Judicial Magistrate First Class and Chief Judicial Magistrates and details of cases pending before sessions courts and status of undertrials in them.