1 CGHC010356122026 2026:CGHC:41320 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 2410 of 2026 Raj Kumar Yadav S/o Late Sobran Yadav Aged About 52 Years R/o- Village- Pathrai, Police Station- Kamleshwarpur, District Surguja (C.G.) ... Appellant. Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Kamleshwarpur, District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondent. (cause title downloaded from CIS Periphery) For Appellant : Mr. Anurag Singh, Advocate. For State : Mr. Sacchidanand Yadav, PL. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi ) Order on Board 23/09/2026 1. Heard on application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act (IA No.2/2026). 2. Considering the reasons assigned in the application and the delay of 56 days, this Court is inclined to condone the delay. Accordingly, above application is allowed. 3. Heard. 4. After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does not want to press the instant appeal and, therefore, may be permitted to withdraw the same. He further submits that the present appeal Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI DN: cn=AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, ou=HIGH COURT, o=HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN 2 arises out of Special Case (Atrocity) No. 47/2021 (State of C.G. Vs. Raj Kumar Yadav), pending before the Special Judge (Atrocities), Ambikapur, District Surguja. In the said case, charges were framed on 02.09.2023 and, since then, the case has been listed for hearing/recording of evidence on more than 20 occasions, as per the online status of the case. However, none of the prosecution witnesses has been examined so far. He further submits that the prosecution has cited a total of 13 witnesses. In these circumstances, he submits that the concerned Trial Court may be directed to decide the aforesaid case expeditiously within a stipulated period. 5. Learned State counsel does not oppose the aforesaid prayer. 6. As contended by learned counsel for the appellant, the case has been listed on about 20 occasions for recording the statements of the prosecution witnesses, but till date, none of the prosecution witnesses has been examined. If that is so, the manner in which the proceedings before the Trial Court are being conducted cannot be appreciated, and the matter requires attention. However, considering that the charges were framed in the year 2023, the concerned Special Court is directed to decide Special Case (Atrocity) No. 47/2021 expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. With the aforesaid observation, the instant appeal is disposed of as withdrawn. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Ajay