Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 827 (CHH)

SHEKHAR PAL v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

CRMP/905/2026 · 2026-03-31

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:14892 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 905 of 2026 Shekhar Pal S/o Shri Rameshwar Pal Aged About 32 Years R/o Indira Gandhi Ward, Pipariya, District Narmadapur, Madhya Pradesh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Pendra, District Gaurela- Pendra-Marwahi 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 01.04.2026 1. This is an o6ce reference. 2. This Court, vide order dated 04.11.2025 passed in MCRC No. 8742 of 2025, while rejecting the bail of the applicant, namely, Shekhar Pal, 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 four months from the date of receipt of a certi;ed copy of that order, if there was no legal impediment. 3. The learned Special Judge (NDPS Act), Bilaspur District- Bilaspur KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 (C.G.) vide his request letter dated 28.02.2026 has requested for grant of three months time for concluding the trial. 4. It transpires from perusal of the PUD that in the present case, the evidence of six prosecution witnesses have already been recorded and the evidence of the Investigating O6cer remains incomplete for the purpose of cross-examination by the defence. At present, the evidence of three prosecution witnesses, including the Investigating O6cer, are yet to be recorded. The case was also ;xed for prosecution evidence on 02.03.2026. It is also revealed that summons/warrants were issued to the witnesses through the Nodal O6cer, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur, however, the prosecution could not secure the presence of the witnesses, resulting in delay in disposal of the case. In these circumstances, the learned trial Court has sought an extension of three months’ time to conclude the trial. 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 three months from today. 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