Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 31136 (CHH)

MANOJ KUMAR v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

CRMP/1999/2025 · 2025-06-29

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:29237 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1999 of 2025 Manoj Kumar S/o Satyaram Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Semra Pur Prasad, Post Semra, Semra Pure Prasad, District Basti, U.P. (Address As Per Challan) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Tikrapara, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : None For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 30.06.2025 1. This is an office reference. 2. This Court, vide order dated 09.08.2024 passed in MCRC No. 4562 of 2024, while allowing the bail to the applicant, namely, Manoj Kumar, had expressed its trust that the trial Court would make an earnest endeavor to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order, if there was no legal impediment. 3. Earlier on one occasion also, this Court had granted extension of KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 time for compliance of the order dated 09.08.2024. 4. The learned Special Judge (NDPS Act), Raipur, District-Raipur (C.G.) vide his request letter dated 18.06.2025 has requested for grant of some more time for concluding the trial. 5. It transpires from perusal of the PUD, that in the present case, after the charges were framed, the statements of four witnesses have been recorded. However, at the stage of evidence, the accused has been absent since 06/01/2025. The accused is a resident of State of Uttar Pradesh, due to which the execution of the arrest warrant could not be carried out. Owing to the absence of the accused, the case could not be disposed of within the time prescribed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of some more time for concluding the trial. 6. 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 four months from today. 7. Accordingly, this CRMP stands disposed off with the aforesaid direction. 8. 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