Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 38644 (CHH)

SUBHASH FANSE v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

CRMP/2454/2025 · 2025-08-05

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:39152 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2454 of 2025 Subhash Fanse S/o Late Shri Tej Rao Aged About 33 Years R/o- Kududand, Chandni Chowk, P.S.- Civil Lines, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Officer In Charge, P.S. Civil Lines, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) (Cause title taken from the case information system) For Applicant : None For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 06.08.2025 1. This is an office reference. 2. This Court, vide order dated 26.03.2025 passed in MCRC No. 2374 of 2025, while allowing the bail to the applicant, namely, Subhash Fanse, 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 four months from the date of passing of the order, if there was no legal impediment. 3. The learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur District- KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Bilaspur (C.G.) vide his request letter dated 22.07.2025 has requested for grant of two month time for concluding the trial. 4. It transpires from perusal of the PUD that in this case, out of total 12 prosecution witnesses, 6 prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined. Summons/warrants have been continuously issued to ensure their presence and three consecutive dates have also been allotted for the early disposal of the case. However, due to non-service of summons and even after service, the non-appearance of the witnesses, the evidence could not be completed. These witnesses are the main and material witnesses of the case and their examination is essential. Hence, he prays for grant of further two months time for concluding the trial. 5. 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 two months from today. 6. Accordingly, this CRMP stands disposed off with the aforesaid direction. 7. 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