Chhattisgarh High Court
CRMP/2387/2026 of HARISHANKAR SAHU Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 10 September 2026
2026:CGHC:39961 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2387 of 2026 1 - Harishankar Sahu S/o Kartikram Sahu Aged About 25 Years R/o Village- Bardwar, Police Station- Kota, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh --- Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police
CGHC010348982026
2026:CGHC:39961
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRMP No. 2387 of 2026
1 - Harishankar Sahu S/o Kartikram Sahu Aged About 25 Years R/o Village- Bardwar, Police Station- Kota, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
--- Applicant
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Kota, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
--- Respondent
(Cause title is taken from CIS system)
For Applicant
: Mr. Samarth Singh, Advocate
For Respondent/State
: Mr. Sharad Mishra, P.L.
Hon'ble Shri Justice
Parth Prateem Sahu
Order On Board
11/09/2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. This criminal miscellaneous petition is filed seeking following relief :- “It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the present petition and modify / delete the direction contained in paragraph 8 of the order dated 25.04.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 2293 of 2026 to the extent that the fixed outer limit of "preferably within a period of six months" is removed, while retaining the observation that the Trial Court shall BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN
make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as Possible in accordance with law; &/Or pass any other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”
2. Learned counsel for applicant submits that High Court while allowing the bail application could not have fixed the time for conclusion of trial. In support of his contention, he placed reliance upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Allahabad High Court Bar Assn. v. State of U.P., (2024) 6 SCC 267 and in case of Sangram Sadashiv Suryavanshi Vs. The State of Maharashtra, in Cr.A. No. 4758 of 2024, decided on 25.11.2024.
3. Learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for applicant and would submit that direction is for early disposal of criminal case pending against petitioner, therefore, petitioner could not be aggrieved person as no adverse observation has been made against him.
4. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents placed on record.
5. While allowing the bail application in favour of petitioner, the Court has made following observation : “However, this Court hopes and trust that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six months from today, if there is no legal impediment.”
6. In the observation the Court has observed that trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six months from today, if there is no legal impediment.
7. The decisions which are relied upon by learned counsel for petitioner of Hon’ble Supreme Court deals with the issue relating to the difficulties to be faced by trial Court pursuant to the order of High Court for deciding the case in time bound manner.
8. In the aforementioned facts of the case I do not find any merit in this petition. Accordingly, this petition is liable to be and it is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Balram