Honble TIBREWAL, J. – The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer to quash criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No. 341 of 1990 (Old No. 13/86) now pending in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Lower Division) cum-Judicial Magistrate No. 15, Jaipur City, Jaipur, on the ground of delay. (2) On the report of Ram Swaroop Gupta, Asstt. Superintendent, Postal Depart- ment, lodged at Police Station, Gandhi Nagar, Jaipur, Crime No. 28/85 was registered under Sections 253 and 332 IPC. In the said report, an allegation was made against the petitioner that he gave fists blows to Postman, Bhagirath while he was on duty. As per the medical report, Bhagirath sustained one bruise measuring 2x1 cm. on left side of jaw and the same was opined to be simple in nature. After com- pletion of investigation, the police submitted charge-sheet in the Court of the learned Magistrate on 6.1.86. The petitioner appeared in Court on 2.5.86. Charges were framed under Sections-451, 332 and 353 IPC on 20.6.89, since then only three witnesses have been examined out of 15 witnesses named in the calendar. The statement of Bhagirath was partially recorded on 3.4.91 and his remaining state- ment was recorded on 5.6.91. Two more witnesses namely, PW 2 Chauthmal and PW 3 Amar Singh were examined on 3.4.91. After 3.4.91 no progress has been made in trial. (3). It is contended by the learned counsel that the petitioner has been facing trial for the last ten years and the allegations against him are not of serious nature. Learned counsel contended that at the time of incident, as per prosecution case itself, the petitioner was 19 years of age i.e. Blow 21 years and he was student at that time. Now he has done his graduation and he is in search of a job, but on account of pendency of these criminal proceedings, he is unable to get any job. Learned counsel contended that the petitioner has already suffered a lot on accou- nt of protracted trial and taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances, the proceedings should now be quashed. (4). It is not disputed that the petitioner is facing trial for the last ten years. It is also not disputed that only three witnesses have been examined and they too were examined in the year 1991. (4). It is not disputed that the petitioner is facing trial for the last ten years. It is also not disputed that only three witnesses have been examined and they too were examined in the year 1991. The petitioner has been appearing in Court and at the time of incident, he was 18-19 years of age. As per the medical report of Bhagirath, he had sustained bruise of superficial nature. The petitioner has suffered a lot on account of long pendency of criminal case against him. In the facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case in which proceedings should be quashed against the petitioner on the ground of delay and this case is surely covered by the decision rendered by me in Chhote Lal vs. State of Raj. (1) (5). Consequently, this petition is allowed. Proceedings of criminal case No. 341/90 pending against the petitioner in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) and Judicial Magistrate No. 15, Jaipur City, Jaipur, are hereby quashed.