Meghalaya High Court
Crl.Petn./58/2026 of SHUBHAM DEB Vs THE STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND ORS. on 5 June 2026
of 3 HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Crl.Petn.No.58/2026 Date of Order: 05.06.2026 Shri Shubham Deb ..... Petitioner Vs. 1. The State of Meghalaya, represented by the Secretary, Government of Meghalaya, Home (Police) Department, East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya 2. Investigating Officer,
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
Crl.Petn.No.58/2026
Date of Order: 05.06.2026
Shri Shubham Deb ..... Petitioner
Vs.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The State of Meghalaya, represented by the Secretary, Government of Meghalaya, Home (Police) Department, East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya
2. Investigating Officer, Sadar Police Station, Shillong, East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya.
3. Shri Wakrambam Mocha Singh ..... Respondents
Coram:
Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Revati Mohite Dere, Chief Justice
Appearance: For the Petitioners : Mr. K. Ch. Gautam, Adv
Ms. G.C. Marboh, Adv
For the Respondents : Mr. J. Thabah, GA
JUDGMENT: (Oral)
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. By this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the proceeding initiated against him and presently pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate at Shillong, being G.R. Case Serial No.01 Daily List
No.246(S) of 2016. The petitioner is facing prosecution under Section 380 of the IPC.
3. The grievance of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the case is of 2016 and is pending for the last 10 years with no closure in sight. He submits that there are five witnesses, whom the prosecution intended to examine, out of which, four witnesses have been examined, the last witness having been examined in the year 2022. He submits that the last witness to be examined by the prosecution, is not appearing despite several dates. He states that the said witness is not being produced by the prosecution. It is the duty of the prosecution to ensure that the witnesses that they propose to examine are produced on the date given by the trial court. Right to an expeditious trial is the right of an accused under Article 21 of the Constitution.
4. Considering the aforesaid, instead of quashing the proceeding, it would be appropriate to direct the learned trial court to dispose of the said case as expeditiously as possible and in any event within six months from the date of receipt of this order. It is made clear, that for whatever reason if the prosecution is unable to produce the last witness or any other witness that they seek to examine, the learned trial court to take appropriate steps to conclude the case.
5. The petition is allowed to the extent aforesaid and is disposed of.
6. The Registry to send a copy of this order passed today to the learned trial court to enable the learned trial court to conclude the trial expeditiously as directed.
7. It is made clear, that this Court has not gone into the merits of the evidence as adduced against the petitioner and as such, all contentions of all parties on merits are kept open.
8. All parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order.
(Revati Mohite Dere)
Chief Justice
Meghalaya 05.06.2026 “Lam DR-PS”
Digitally signed by LAMPHRANG KHARCHANDY Date: 2026.06.05 18:53:10 IST Signature Not Verified