Judgment Aftab Alam, J. 1. The petitioner who at the material time was a Junior Engineer in the Public Health Engineering Department and was posted at Deoghar is facing a prosecution before the Special Judge (Vigilance), South Bihar for alleged offence punishable under various sections of the Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1949. Another co-accused in the case was one Om Prakash Mishra who at the material time was posted as Assistant Engineer. 2. According to the proseuction case, 238 pieces of pipe lying in the Departments godown were misappropriated by the accused and were sold by them as scrap iron in the market. The sale-proceeds amounting to Rs.7,759/- was not deposited in the Government treasury. The aforesaid occurrence took place on 20-11-1980 and the FIR was lodged in 1988. The charge-sheet was submitted on 14-2-1996. 3. On submission of the charge-sheet, the petitioner and the other co-accused Om Prakash Mishra made an application for their discharge in terms of Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitions filed on behalf of the petitioner and the aforesaid Om Prakash Mishra were taken up together by the Special Judge who by order dated 15-9-1998 rejected their prayer holding that there were sufficient materials against the accused for proceeding with the trial. He accordingly fixed 28-10-1998 for framing of charges. Against that order Om Prakash Mishra came to this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 2443/ 1998 seeking quashing of that order as also the entire criminal prosecution arising out of Vigilance P. S. Cases No.0044/1980, dated 22-9-1980 and Special Case No. 66/1983. The aforesaid Criminal Misc. was allowed by order dated 18-12-1998 1999 (1) PLJR 207 : 1999 BCCR 144, and a learned Single Judge of this Court was pleased to quash the prosecution, insofar as Om Prakash Mishra was concerned, on the ground of inordinate delay and the failure to conclude the trial speedily. The aforesaid Criminal Misc. was allowed by order dated 18-12-1998 1999 (1) PLJR 207 : 1999 BCCR 144, and a learned Single Judge of this Court was pleased to quash the prosecution, insofar as Om Prakash Mishra was concerned, on the ground of inordinate delay and the failure to conclude the trial speedily. In para 6 of that order, it was observed as follows : "Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case particularly in view of the fact that the occurrence as of the year 1980 and the FIR was lodged in 1988 and thereafter charge-sheet was submitted in 1996, I am was of the opinion that continuance of the prosecution for last more than a decade itself infringes the right of the petitioner to speedy trial and the case is squarely covered by the ratio decided by the apex Court in A. R. Antulays case, AIR 1992 SC 1701 : 1992 (1) PLJR 41 (SC). In that view of the matter, the prosecution against the petitioner is liable to quashed." 4. Now, it is the turn of the petition to challenge the order dated 15-9-1998 passed by the Special Judge Vigilance and to pray for the quashing of the entire prosecution. 5. The ground on which the prosecution was quashed in the case of Om Prakash Mishra applies equally to the case of the petitioner and I see no reason why the relief granted to Om Prakash Mishra may not also be granted to the petitioner. 6. Mrs. Anita Singh, JC to Special P.P. Vigilance in her endeavour to make out some distinction in the case of the two accused submitted that the petitioner was a named accused in the FIR whereas the co-accused Om Prakash Mishra was not named in the FIR I fail to see how this circumstance alone can make a material difference so far as the ground of delay is I concerned. I am, therefore, unable to accept the submission made on behalf of the Vigilance that the order passed in the case of Om Prakash Mishra would not apply to the petitioners case. 7. Following, therefore, the order passed in the case of Om Prakash Mishra, this petition too is allowed and the impugned order as also the entire criminal prosecution so far as the petitioner Raghubansh Kumar is concerned, stands quashed. In the result, this application is allowed.