1 2025:CGHC:16701 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1270 of 2025 Liu Gaoxuan S/o Liu Baoting Aged About 29 Years R/o Xiangcheng City, Henna Province, China Pp No. G 25047231 Working At Sepco Electric Power Construction Corporation, Balco, P.S. Balco, District Korba Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O., P.S. Balco, District Korba Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicants : None For Non-applicant : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 09.04. 2025 1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. 2. This is an ofÏce reference. 3. This Court, vide order dated 15.09.2023, passed in CRR No. 450 of 2013, while dismissing the petition to the petitioner, namely, Liu Gaoxuan had expressed its trust that the trial Court should make an earnest endeavor to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law, preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of a certified copy of this order without granting unnecessary adjournment to the parties, if there was no legal impediment. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 4. Earlier on one occasion also, this Court had granted extension of time for compliance of the order dated 15.09.2023 passed in CRR No. 450/2013. 5. The learned Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Korba, District-Korba, (C.G.) vide his request letter dated 17.03.2025 has requested for grant of some more time for concluding the trial. 6. It transpires from perusal of the PUD that the case proceedings indicate on September 18-19, 2024, the investigator, Vivek Sharma, underwent partial examination. On September 26, 2024, prosecution witness Gunjan Gupta's partial statement was recorded and on September 27, 2024, she was discharged after completing her examination and cross- examination. On October 7-8, 2024, Vivek Sharma's partial examination continued. However, due to the transfer of the presiding judge and the non- appointment of a new judge, the case was transferred to the Principal District and Sessions Judge. This Court first took up the case on October 17, 2024. On November 11, 2024, Vivek Sharma's partial examination resumed, but the defence counsel raised an objection, stating they didn't have all the necessary documents. The defence was granted a one-week extension to review the documents. On November 26, 2024, Vivek Sharma's partial examination continued. On December 19, 2024, he was present for further examination, but the accused, Viral Mehta, and others filed an application objecting to the appointment of the special public prosecutor, which delayed the examination. The application was dismissed on January 6, 2025, as it was deemed false. On January 13, 2025, Vivek Sharma was present, but the defence requested an extension for document review. Finally, on January 28-30, 2025, Vivek Sharma's remaining examination was completed. 7. On 05.02.2025, the public prosecutor submitted two applications after 3 the main examination of Investigating OfÏcer Vivek Sharma was completed. The first application, under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code, sought to add five companies - BALCO, SEPCO, GDCL, BVIL and DCPL - as additional accused. The second application, under Section 311 of Cr. P.C., requested additional evidence. Both applications were decided on February 21, 2025. The concerned Court dismissed the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. but accepted the one under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. ordering the five companies to be added as accused. BALCO, GDCL, and BVIL challenged that order before this Hon’ble High Court, Bilaspur, through criminal revision petitions (293/2025, 305/2025, and 318/2025). In the said revision petitions, the co-ordinate Bench of this Court has directed to postpone the implementation of the order dated 21-02-2025 in respect of the petitioner till the next date by order dated 11-03-2025. Due to these developments, the case couldn't be concluded within the prescribed time. Therefore, a request has been made to extend the period for concluding the case. 8. The request appears to be reasonable. The concerned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial as early as possible, preferably within a further period of six months from today. 9. Accordingly, this CRMP stands disposed off with the aforesaid direction. 10. Registry is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal