Pyare Chand vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 27 March, 2023

[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Pyare Chand vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 27 March, 2023

Bench: Sandeep Sharma

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

                                                              Cr. MP (M) No. 668 of 2023




                                                                             .
                                                        Date of Decision:28.03.2023





     -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Pyare Chand                                                               ...Petitioner
                                             Versus
     State of Himachal Pradesh                                             ...Respondent





     -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Coram:
     The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
     Whether approved for reporting?1 .





     -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     For the Petitioner                  Mr. Karan Kapoor and Mr. Nitin Rishi,
                                         Advocates.
     For the Respondent                       Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar
                                              and    Mr.   B.C.Verma,   Additional
                     r                        Advocate Generals with Mr. Rahul

                                              Thakur,    and Mr. Ravi Chauhan,
                                              Deputy Advocate Generals.
     -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

Primarily, prayer has been made for enlargement of bail petitioner on bail on the ground of inordinate delay in conclusion of trial. However, having taken note of the fact that Court below has already fixed the matter on 20.04.2023 for recording the statements of remaining prosecution witnesses, this Court is not inclined to consider the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail on the ground of inordinate delay in conclusion of the trial.

2. Faced with aforesaid situation, learned counsel representing the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

::: Downloaded on - 29/03/2023 20:33:21 :::CIS 2

present petition at this stage with liberty to file afresh at appropriate stage, in accordance with law, if required and desired.

3. Accordingly, in view of the aforesaid prayer having been made by learned counsel representing the petitioner, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty, as prayed for.

4. Having taken note of the fact that the petitioner is behind the bars for more than 4 ½ years, coupled with the fact that co-accused, from whose conscious possession contraband was recovered, already stands enlarged on bail on the ground of inordinate delay, this Court hopes an trust that court below would make all out efforts to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably on or before 31st May, 2023, failing which, this Court shall be constrained to consider the prayer made by the petitioner for grant of bail on the ground of inordinate delay in conclusion of trial.

Otherwise also, it has been already made aware to all Courts on the administrative side that jail appeals as well as cases of under trial are required to be heard and decided on priority basis.

5. Registry is directed to apprise the learned Court below with regard to passing of instant order, to enable it to do the needful.

(Sandeep Sharma) Judge March 28, 2023 (shankar) ::: Downloaded on - 29/03/2023 20:33:21 :::CIS

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Himachal Pradesh High Court