loader image

Chhattisgarh HC Directs Trial Courts to Avoid Unnecessary Adjournments and Fix Short Dates for Recording Evidence, Especially when Accused is in Custody

Chhattisgarh HC Directs Trial Courts to Avoid Unnecessary Adjournments and Fix Short Dates for Recording Evidence, Especially when Accused is in Custody

Hariom Pal v. State of Chhattisgarh [Decided on 03-11-2025]

Chhattisgarh High Court

In a bail application filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), seeking regular bail before the Chhattisgarh High Court, a Single Judge Bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha rejected the bail application and directed the trial court to pre-pone the matter to conclude the trial within four months.

The applicant had been arrested for an offence punishable under Section 20-B(II)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The prosecution’s case was that a total of 33.7 kilograms of Ganja was recovered from the joint possession of the applicant and the co-accused. Thereafter, the applicant’s first bail application was rejected on merit by this Court on 31.01.2025.

The Court perused the previously passed order and stated that bail was rejected because the quantity of seized Ganja was well above the commercial quantity and that the applicant failed to furnish any satisfactory explanation for the same. The Court was informed that the Trial Court fixed the present date for recording evidence, with the next date set for 08-01-2026.

Thus, the Court directed the Trial Court to pre-pone the matter and fix short dates for recording evidence, considering that the applicant had been in custody since 08-11-2024. The Court also directed the Director General of Police to ensure the presence of all remaining witnesses on the date fixed by the Trial Court. Accordingly, the Court rejected the present bail application while hoping that the Trial Court makes an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial within four months.

Further, the Court observed that the Trial Courts tend to grant long adjournments even where the accused is in custody, and such practice not only delays the conclusion of the trial but also adversely affects the fundamental right to speedy trial guaranteed by the Constitution. Thus, the Court directed all trial courts to make efforts to avoid unnecessary adjournments and to fix short dates, particularly in cases where the accused is in judicial custody.


Appearances:

For Applicant – Mr. Ravikar Patel

For Non-Applicant – Ms. Ankita Shukla

PDF Icon

Hariom Pal v. State of Chhattisgarh

Preview PDF