AADITYA JATAV OFFICE REFERENCE, ,Bharat Lal Sahu,Abhishek Nirala vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — CRMP/1431/2026

Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 15th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010201522026

Filing Number

CRMP/8551/2026

Filing Date

13-May-2026

Registration No

CRMP/1431/2026

Registration Date

14-May-2026

Judge

Hon'ble The Chief Justice

Coram

Hon'ble The Chief Justice

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRIMINAL MATTERS ( 14 )

Sub-Category

MATTERS RELATING TO RESTORATION / MODIFICATION / EXTENSION OF TIME IN DECIDED CRIMINAL CASE ( 1450 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

15-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 16-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.AADITYA JATAV OFFICE REFERENCE, ,Bharat Lal Sahu,Abhishek Nirala

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF

    The High Court of Chhattisgarh granted an office reference petition, allowing the trial court one additional month to conclude the NDPS Act trial of petitioner Aaditya Jatav. The court found the extension request reasonable, as the accused's statement could not be recorded due to a filed exemption application, preventing trial progression. The trial court is directed to complete proceedings and pronounce judgment within one month of receiving this order. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 15-Jun-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice

  4. 13-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRMP/1431/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Chhattisgarh granted an office reference petition, allowing the trial court one additional month to conclude the NDPS Act trial of petitioner Aaditya Jatav. The court found the extension request reasonable, as the accused's statement could not be recorded due to a filed exemption application, preventing trial progression. The trial court is directed to complete proceedings and pronounce judgment within one month of receiving this order. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case