Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 28560 (CHH)

ROSHAN LAL MISHRA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

CRMP/1890/2026 · 2026-07-21

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010280192026 2026:CGHC:31188 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1890 of 2026 Roshan Lal Mishra S/o Sitaram Mishra Aged About 38 Years R/o Shivbihari Colony, Village Dunda, Police Station Muchagbahan, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Dantewada, District Dantewada, 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 22.07.2026 1. This is an office reference. 2. This Court, vide order dated 15.10.2025 passed in MCRC No. 8219 of 2025, while allowing the bail of the petitioner, namely, Roshan Lal Mishra, 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 that 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 15.10.2025. 4. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, District- South Bastar Dantewada (C.G.) vide his request letter dated 13.07.2026 has requested for grant of some more time for concluding the trial. 5. It transpires from perusal of the P.U.D. that the case is presently at the stage of recording the statement of the accused. The record further reveals that the accused, Roshan Mishra, has remained absent from the stage of recording of his statement. Warrants of arrest are being issued against the said accused through the Inspector General of Police, Bastar Range, along with the requisite memorandum, however, his presence could not be secured. Owing to the non-appearance of the accused, further proceedings in the matter could not be undertaken and the trial could not be concluded within the stipulated period. Accordingly, the learned trial Court has sought extension of time and has prayed for grant of a further period for securing the presence of the accused, completing the remaining proceedings and 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