Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 20269 (CHH)

RAJVINDER SINGH @ LADDU v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

CRMP/1333/2026 · 2026-05-10

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:21995 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1333 of 2026 Rajvinder Singh @ Laddu S/o Arjun Singh Aged About 32 Years R/o Housing Board, Lig-2, Quarter No. 331, 32 Acre, Police Station Vaishali Nagar, District- Durg (C.G.), Permanent R/o Village- Talvandi, Dasoda Singh Police Station Katthu, Nangal, District- Amritsar (Punjab), (As Per Charge Sheet) ... Petitioner(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Station House OfÏcer Police Station Mohan Nagar, District- Durg (C.G.) .. Respondent(s) For Petitioner : None For Respondent/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 11.05.2026 1. This is an ofÏce reference. 2. This Court, vide order dated 28.08.2025 passed in MCRC No. 6096 of 2025, while allowing the bail of the petitioner, namely, Ravinder Singh @ Laddu, 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 passing of KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 order, if there was no legal impediment. 3. The learned Special Judge (NDPS Act), Durg District- Durg (C.G.) vide his request letter dated 25.04.2026 has requested for grant of 06 months time for concluding the trial. 4. It transpires from perusal of the PUD that the present case is currently fixed for prosecution evidence. After receipt of the order dated 01.09.2025, necessary proceedings were undertaken to ensure expeditious completion of the trial. So far, the evidence of 04 prosecution witnesses have been recorded, while the evidence of 08 prosecution witnesses still remains to be recorded, due to which the case could not be disposed of within the prescribed time limit. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, additional time of six months is required for the said purpose. Hence, it is most humbly prayed that this Court may kindly be pleased to grant an extension of six months to conclude the trial. 5. The request made by the learned trial Court, is allowed, however, instead of granting six months, this Court deems it appropriate to grant further 04 months time for concluding the trial 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