C. K. PRASAD, J. ( 1 ) THE sale petitioner has filed this application for quashing the entire proceedings pending in the Court of 2nd Addi. Chief Judicial Magistrate Indore in Criminal Case No. 2487179 (old No. 6997175) for an offence under S. 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and S. 115 of the Defence of India Act. ( 2 ) THE facts giving rise to this application are that on 16. 7. 1975, an inspection was made by the Inspector of Food and Civil Supplies Department in the business premises of the petitioner. After inspection, on 17. 7. 1975, a written report was given to the officer-in-charge of Malharganj police. According to the first information report, 115 bags of gram was found in godown No. 54 at Sanyogitaganj Mandi Indore. However, the said godown has not been entered in the licence of the petitioner. It has been further alleged in the first information report that in the register and bill book name of the party to whom the food articles were sold nor their licence number have been entered. It has further been alleged that signatures of the purchasers have also not been taken in the register. Instances have been cited in the first information report about sale of maze and other articles to various persons and failure on the part of the petitioner to enter the same in the register. ( 3 ) THE police, after investigation, submitted challan on 12. 9. 1975 against the petitioner for an offence under S. 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act as also under S. 114 of the Defence of India Act. ( 4 ) THE first witness was examined on behalf of the prosecution on 24. 4. 1978 and till 17. 3. 1990, ten witnesses were examined. On 26. 3. 1992, an application was filed on behalf of the prosecution for withdrawal of the case. However, the same was rejected on 9. 1. 1993. Thereafter no evidence has been led on behalf of the prosecution in support of the case. ( 5 ) MR. Bagadiya, learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of the application submitted that the prosecution of the petitioner for nearly two decades for any fault which can be attributed to him, is an abuse of process of the Court and on this ground alone, the entire prosecution of the petitioner is fit to be quashed. ( 5 ) MR. Bagadiya, learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of the application submitted that the prosecution of the petitioner for nearly two decades for any fault which can be attributed to him, is an abuse of process of the Court and on this ground alone, the entire prosecution of the petitioner is fit to be quashed. He has submitted that he appeared before the trial Court on each and every date and did every thing which is possible for conclusion of the trial. However, although nearly two decades have expired from the date of occurrence, the trial has not reached its finality. ( 6 ) MR. G. Desai learned Dy. Govt. Advocate appearing on behalf of the State is not in a position, to controvert the stand of Shri Bagadiya that the delay has occurred because of inaction on the part of the prosecution to produce the evidence expeditiously. ( 7 ) THE date of occurrence of the case is 16. 7. 1975 for which the first information report was lodged on the following date. In fact the investigating agency submitted challan within a reasonable period on 12. 9. 1975. Even after a lapse of two decades the prosecution has not come to an end. The prosecution has itself filed an application for withdrawal of the case, which was rejected and thereafter it has lost interest in pursuing the prosecution. In my opinion, the continued prosecution of the petitioner is an abuse of process of the Court and it is a fit case in which prosecution of the petitioner is fit to be quashed on the ground of delay in conclusion of the trial, itself. I do accordingly. ( 8 ) IN the result, the application is allowed. The prosecution of the petitioner in Criminal Case No. 2487179 (old No. 6997175) pending in the Court of 2nd Addi. Chief Judicial Magistrate Indore, is hereby quashed. Record of the lower Court be sent back immediately with a copy of this order. Petition allowed. .