Bhimsen Shivhare v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Cr.M.P. No. 1274 of 2017

1. Bhimsen Shivhare S/o Shivram Shivhare Aged About 56 Years R/o Vindhya Colony, House No. B-8, Nowrojabad, District Umaria, Madhya Pradesh.

2. Sumit Shivhare S/o Shri Bhimsen Shivhare, Aged About 28 Years R/o Police Station Khamaria, District Jabalpur, At Present R/o Umaria, Vindhya Colony, House No. B/8, Pinora Khadan, Nowrojabad, District Umaria, Madhya Pradesh.

3. Madhuri Shivhare W/o Bhimsen Shivhare, Aged About 50 Years Vindhya Colony, House No. B-8, Nowrojabad, District Umaria, Madhya Pradesh.

---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P. S. Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

2. Monika Jaiswal W/o Sumit Shivhare, Aged About 29 Years R/o Khutanpara, Baikunthpur, District Koria, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For the Petitioners : Shri Varun Sharma, Advocate.

For Respondent No.1/State : Shri Neeraj Sharma, Deputy Government Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant

ORDER

18.09.2017 1.

Heard.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on a complaint made by respondent No.2, the petitioners are being prosecuted for the offence under Sections 498-A and 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The charges were framed against petitioner No.1 - Bhimsen Shivhare on 28.11.2014, petitioner No.2 - Sumit Shivhare on 26.10.2015 and petitioner No.3 - Madhuri Shivhare on 12.12.2014. More than two years

have been passed but till date only one witness has been partly examined, whose statement is yet to conclude. Hence, it is prayed that a direction may be issued to the trial Court to expedite the trial of the case in the interest of justice.

3.

Learned State counsel has no objection to the above submission. 4.

Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the documents on record.

5.

From perusal of the order-sheets, it appears that the case is being regularly fixed for examination of the prosecution witnesses since 26.10.2015. As many as 12 dates have been fixed for examination of the prosecution witnesses, however, the attendance of the witnesses could not be secured by the prosecution. It is such a case in which there is requirement on the part of the Court as well to make concerted efforts for the appearance of the witnesses for the trial to be concluded as expeditiously as possible. Hence, for these reasons, this petition stands disposed off at the motion stage. The trial Court is directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. 6.

Accordingly, this petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge Nimmi