Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 61473 (CHH)

SIKANDER SINGH DHILLON v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

CRMP/3753/2025 · 2025-12-10

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:60262 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 3753 of 2025 Sikander Singh Dhillon S/o Shri Jogender Singh Aged About 74 Years R/o House No. 14, Pyara Singh Colony, Rupnagar, Ropar, Rupnagar, Punjab ... Petitioner versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Surajpur, District - Surajpur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Petitioner : None. For Respondent : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 11.12.2025 1. This is an office reference. 2. This Court, vide order dated 07.11.2023, passed in MCRC No. 6759 of 2023, while allowing the bail to the applicant, namely, Awadh Patel 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 six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order, if there was no legal impediment. 3. Earlier on three occasions also, this Court had granted extension of time VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.12.15 19:05:21 +0530 2 for compliance of the order dated 07.11.2023. 4. The learned Special Judge (Protection of Depositors Interest Act) Surajpur, District Surajpur (C.G.) vide his request letter dated 21/11/2025 has requested for grant of some more time for concluding the trial. 5. It transpires from a perusal of the PUD that in the present case, a total of 41 witnesses are to be examined, out of which the evidence of 38 witnesses has already been recorded. A supplementary challan was presented against the co-accused, namely Subrato Bhattacharya and Gurmeet Singh, on 24.03.2025. Consequently, the evidence of the previously examined witnesses is being recorded again, due to which additional time is required for the disposal of the case. Hence, he prays for the grant of a further period of six months for concluding the trial. 6. The request made by the learned Trial Court is allowed. However, instead of granting six months’ time, this Court deems it appropriate to grant a further period of four months for concluding the trial from today 7. Accordingly, this CRMP stands disposed of 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 vaibhav