Criminal Appeal No. 164 of 2001 · Kerala High Court

Crl. Appeal No. 164/2001: 3 :by placing reliance upon Raj Deo Sharma's case. That apart, the decisions relied on by the court below have beensubsequently overruled by a 7 Judges' Constitution Bench in P.Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka – AIR 2002 SC1856. The Constitution Bench has held that in its zeal to protectthe right to speedy trial of an accused, the court is not entitled todevise and enact bars of limitation which the legislature has notchosen to impose. The Constitution Bench proceeded to observethat bars of limitation, judicially engrafted with a view to ensurespeedy trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India may give rise to greater problems like scuttling a trialwithout adjudication and giving easy exit to the accused from theportals of the court. As per the charge sheet, the prosecutionhad proposed to prove its case through 46 witnesses and 68items of documentary evidence.5. The mode by which the court below closed theprosecution evidence and recorded the order of acquittal byplacing reliance upon Raj Deo Sharma's case which has sincebeen overruled by Ramchandra Rao's case, cannot besupported at all. The impugned judgment is, accordingly, set Crl. Appeal No. 164/2001: 4 :aside and the case is remitted to the court below for disposalafresh after giving an opportunity to the prosecution as well asthe accused to substantiate their respective contentions. Theparties shall appear before the court below on 05.10.2009without any further notice. In the result, this appeal is allowed as above. Dated this the 7th day of September, 2009. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE.rv Crl. Appeal No. 164/2001: 5 :V.RAMKUMAR, J.= = = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl. Appeal No. 164 of 2001 = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = JUDGMENT07.09.2009 Crl. Appeal No. 164/2001: 6 :