NANDLAL RATHOUR OFFICE REFERENCE, ,VIKASH PRADHAN vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — CRMP/1542/2026

Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 18th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010226792026

Filing Number

CRMP/9725/2026

Filing Date

15-Jun-2026

Registration No

CRMP/1542/2026

Registration Date

16-Jun-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

18-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.NANDLAL RATHOUR OFFICE REFERENCE, ,VIKASH PRADHAN

Respondent(s)

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

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF

    Case Summary: CRMP No. 1542 of 2026 The Chhattisgarh High Court granted an extension of four months to the trial court to conclude the NDPS Act trial against petitioner Nandlal Rathour. The court found the trial judge's request reasonable, noting that 3 of 12 prosecution witnesses have testified and further evidence, along with the accused's statement and defense evidence, remain pending. The court directed expeditious completion of the trial within the extended timeframe. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Jun-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice

  4. 15-Jun-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRMP/1542/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRMP No. 1542 of 2026 The Chhattisgarh High Court granted an extension of four months to the trial court to conclude the NDPS Act trial against petitioner Nandlal Rathour. The court found the trial judge's request reasonable, noting that 3 of 12 prosecution witnesses have testified and further evidence, along with the accused's statement and defense evidence, remain pending. The court directed expeditious completion of the trial within the extended timeframe. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case