Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5202 (CHH)

PAWAN KUMAR AGRAWAL v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

CRMP/1007/2026 · 2026-04-09

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:16639 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1007 of 2026 Pawan Kumar Agrawal S/o Late Hariom Agrawal Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Basantpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Basantpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh .. Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : None For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 10.04.2026 1. This is an o5ce reference. 2. This Court, vide order dated 16.08.2024 passed in MCRC No. 4641 of 2024, while allowing the bail of the applicant, namely, Pawan Kumar Agrawal, 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 :ling of the charge-sheet, if there was no legal impediment. 3. The learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Wadrafnagar District- KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) vide his request letter dated 23.03.2026 has requested for grant of two months time for concluding the trial. 4. It transpires from perusal of the PUD that that in the present case, summons/warrants were issued to the prosecution witnesses for recording of evidence, however, on account of their non-appearance, the evidence could not be recorded. It is further revealed that in the present case there are in all four Investigating O5cers whose evidence is yet to be recorded. It further appears that out of total 31 prosecution witnesses cited in the charge-sheet, evidence of 6 prosecution witnesses is still remaining to be recorded. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, it is respectfully submitted that the present request be kindly allowed and two months’ time be granted for disposal of the case. 5. 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 two months from the date of receipt of a certi:ed copy this order. 6. Accordingly, this CRMP stands disposed o5 with the aforesaid direction. 7. Registry is directed to send a certi:ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal