JUDGMENT 1. - The petitioner has prayed in this petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. that the proceedings pending in the Court of Addl. Chief judicial Magistrate, Sojat City in Crl. Case No. 126/85 may be quashed in the interest of justice on the ground of extra-ordinary delay in trial. The petitioner's contention is that his right to speedy trial, now considered as a fundamental right, has been infringed and further continuation of the proceedings amounts to abuse of process of law. 2. The Crl. Case No. 126/85 under section 7 r/w 16 Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short 'the PFA) was registered on 16.7.1985 on the basis,of the sample taken by the food inspector on 14.10.1984. The petitioner-accused appeared in the Court on 9.1.1986 and requested to send the sample to Central Food Laboratory but it was not sent on ten dates upto 17.2.1988. However, the sample was sent to Gaziabad instead of directly sending it to Calcutta. Therefore, it was again sent to Calcutta and the report was received on 14.3.1989. Thereafter the witnesses were summoned but no witness was present in the Court till 16.11.1994 i.e. for about five years. At last, one witness Sanwal Singh was present on 22.11.1994 but he did not bring with him some original record and his statements could not be recorded. Second witness was present on 6.4.1995 and the statement of Sanwal Singh were incomplete. Again Sanwal Singh did not attend the Court on several dates upto 22.4.1998. Ultimately, Sanwal Singh was examined on 20.6.1998 and the case was adjourned for hearing the arguments for charge which was framed on 15.5.1999. Third witness was examined on 30.7.1999 but other witnesses were not present. The trial Court is now summoning the witnesses again and the prosecution evidence is still not complete. These facts are revealed from the certified copy of the order-sheets fled by the petitioner. Thus the prosecution has not produced evidence during these long period of 15 years. 3. It is vehemently contended that the petitioner is regularly attending the Court and in that process, has undergone all sorts of physical and mental harassment as well as loss of money. The fundamental right of the petitioner of speedy trial has been violated, so the proceedings of the said criminal case should be quashed in the interest of justice and also to prevent the abuse of the process of law. The fundamental right of the petitioner of speedy trial has been violated, so the proceedings of the said criminal case should be quashed in the interest of justice and also to prevent the abuse of the process of law. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the petition and prayed that the prosecution is not responsible for the delay. Therefore, learned trial Court be directed to finish the trial within a specified time frame. 4. I have gone through the certified copy of the order-sheets which clearly reveals that the petitioner is not in any manner responsible for this inordinate delay in the trial. The case has been adjourned mostly for procuring the attendance of the witnesses. The summons were not issued by the clerk on several occasions and the summons issued by the Court could not be served. No serious efforts seems to have been taken by the Court to procure the attendance. However, the fact is that the petitioner is facing the trial for the last 15 years. I agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner that by regularly attending the Court he is cooperating with the trial and has suffered a lot of mental agony and physical discomfort as well as financial loss. I do not agree with the learned Public Prosecutor that the trial should be further allowed to be taken up for a specific period because the prosecution has not even completed its evidence in 15 years. The prosecution has been given more than sufficient opportunity to lead its evidence but it has proceeded leisurely without caring to get the process served and to produce the witnesses for which no cogent reason is given forthwith on behalf of the prosecution. I have no hesitation to hold that the petitioner's right to speedy trial has been breached in the above facts and circumstances of the case. 5. Resultently, the instant petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed. The proceedings of the criminal case No. 126/85 under section 7 r/w 16 Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 pending in the Court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sojat City and further proceedings are hereby quashed. The bail bonds are also discharged.Petition allowed. *******