Gaurav S/O Arjun Kshirsagar v. State Of Mha. Thr. Pso Ps Beltarodi Nagpur

1 15 wp 91.23

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Letter I/W No. 12109/2023 In CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 91/2023 (D) (Gaurav Kshirsagar Vs. The State of Maharashtra & anr.) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. S.V. Kolhe, APP for respondent/State.

CORAM: M. M. NERLIKAR, J .

DATED : 22/09/2025.

Heard.

2.

Letter dated 03.04.2025 is placed before this Court today. The letter is received from the 13th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class (Court No.8), Nagpur requesting to extend the time for disposal of the RCC NO.1128/2021 (State Vs. Yaramili and others). This Court by an order dated 08.07.2024 directed the concerned Court to dispose of the case within a period of 8 months. However, it appears that there is no cooperation from the Advocate for the accused Nos. 2 and 3 and further as there are many witnesses yet to be examined, the trial is yet not concluded. It appears from the communication that 7 witnesses are examined out of 28 witnesses. It further appears that it will take some time to conclude the trial. Therefore, the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class requested to extend the time of one and half years.

3.

It was expected from the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class to conclude the trial within time

2 15 wp 91.23 period as was directed by this Court by an order dated 08.07.2024. However, for the reasons mentioned above, the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class was not able to conclude the trial. It further appears that the time granted by this Court was over in the month of March 2025, however letter was sent on 03.04.2025. It further appears that thereafter there is no communication from the concerned Magistrate or reminder sent to the Registry of this Court in respect of the communication dated 03.04.2025. It is the duty of the Registry of this Court as well as the learned Magistrate to place on record the said letter before the Court immediately, however neither the Magistrate thereafter sent any communication to the Registry of this Court nor the Registry of this Court has placed the communication dated 03.04.2025 before this Court. However, between this period already the learned Magistrate has availed time period of about 5 to 6 months. 4.

For the reasons set out in the communication dated 03.04.2025, I am inclined to extend the period by six months. It is also made clear that no further extension would be granted. The concerned learned Judicial Magistrate First Class shall take all the efforts to conclude the trial within this extended period.

5.

Needless to mention that the concerned Magistrate shall take care and pursue, in case, any letter is sent to the High Court.

( M. M. NERLIKAR , J.) Gohane Signed by: Mr. J. B. Gohane Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 23/09/2025 16:26:57