Panaji, Sep 1 (TOI): In a case that reflects how the functioning of police may impede the career of an individual seeking police clearance, the high court of Bombay at Goa quashed a criminal case, which showed no progress even after it was registered 17 years ago, against a person who is now aspiring for a government job.

In 1998, an FIR was registered against the petitioner Devendra Manguesh Naik by police regarding an accident at Mapusa. In 2011, the petitioner applied for 'batch' of heavy vehicle and taxi. During verification, police informed him that the record reveals that a case was pending against him.

Subsequently, the petitioner in 2012, requested the police department to strike off his name from criminal record and issue a police clearance as no chargesheet was filed against him in the court. But, there was no response. As the petitioner, who is 37 years old, had appeared for a written examination and was awaiting selection of oral interview for government post, he approached the high court and sought setting aside of the FIR.

While stating that Article 21 of the Constitution of India gives right to speed trial, a division bench comprising justice F M Reis and Justice K L Wadane observed thus: "It reveals that the first information report regarding the alleged offence of the accident punishable under Sections 279 and 337 of the Indian Penal Code took place on March 24, 1998, almost about 17 years. It is not disputed that the complainant, who lodged the first information report, namely Haldankar died. Further, it has come on record that the papers regarding first information report no. l82/1992 are not traceable which goes to show that the offence pending against the petitioner since last 17 years without any progress."

While stating that the first informant or the investigating officer of the crime is no more, the high court noted that in such circumstances, there is absolutely no progress after registration of the crime and this is a hanging sword upon the petitioner which he carried for about 17 years.

The court noted that the continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner is of no use since the police authorities are unable to take further steps since last 17 years. The high court quashed and set aside the FIR.

Advocate Shivan Desai, who appeared for the petitioner sought quashing of the FIR as it was a hurdle to his employment.

On September 23, 2011, the public information officer, superintendent of police, furnished information to the petitioner, which included a copy of the FIR. The petitioner was informed that case papers of the crime are not available at Mapusa police station and that the same were taken by the investigating officer A G Haldankar, who had since expired.

The petitioner was informed by police that although the serial number of the chargesheet is reflected, no chargesheet has been filed in the court.