Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 22345 (CHH)

AWADH PATEL v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

CRMP/1559/2026 · 2026-06-18

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:25152 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1559 of 2026 Awadh Patel S/o Garjan Patel Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Diwanji, Police Station Mharajpur, District Chhatarpur, M.P. ... Petitioner(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Saraypali, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : None For Respondent/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 19.06.2026 1. This is an office reference. 2. This Court, vide order dated 08.08.2024 passed in MCRC No. 3578 of 2025, while allowing the bail of the petitioner, namely, Awadh Patel, 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 copy of the order, if there was no legal impediment. 3. Earlier on two occasions also this Court had granted extension of time for compliance of the order dated 08.08.2024. 4. The learned Special Judge, (NDPS Act), Saraipali District- KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Mahasamund (C.G.) vide her request letter dated 01.06.2026 has requested for grant of four month’s additional time for concluding the trial. 5. It transpires from perusal of the P.U.D. that the case is presently fixed for securing the presence of the accused persons. The record further reveals that the accused persons, namely Avadh Patel and Ganesh Dehayat, are residents of the State of Madhya Pradesh. Warrants of arrest were issued against them for securing their presence, however, their presence could not be ensured. Owing to the non-appearance of the accused persons, further proceedings in the matter could not be undertaken within the stipulated period. In the aforesaid circumstances, the learned trial Court has submitted that upon securing the presence of the accused persons, further proceedings shall be carried out expeditiously. Accordingly, she sought an extension of time and has prayed for grant of a further period of four months for concluding the trial and final disposal of the case. 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