IMPHAL, India, June 5 -- Manipur High Court issued the following order on May 4:

[1] In the captioned appeal, Mr. BR Sharma, learned Central Government Standing Counsel (CGSC) for appellant is before this Court on the Video Conferencing (VC) platform and his colleague Mr. Qulu, learned counsel is before this Court (Physical Court).

[2] On the side of lone respondent, Ms. N. Savitri, learned counsel along with her colleague Mr. N. Leo, learned counsel is before this Court (Physical Court).

[3] Read this in conjunction with and in continuation of earlier proceedings made in the previous listing on 20.04.2026 which reads as follows:

'20.04.2026

Read this in conjunction with and in continuation of earlier proceedings made in the previous listing on 18.02.2026 which reads as follows:

'18.02.2026

[1] Matter mentioned at half past ten.

[2] Ms. Pamchui, learned counsel representing Mr. BR Sharma, State Counsel for appellant NIA and Mr. Leo N., learned counsel on record for the respondent are before this Court.

[3] This Court is informed that the captioned appeal is a statutory appeal under Section 21 of the 'National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (34 of 2008)' ('NIA Act' for convenience) and that it is directed against a bail order dated 10.08.2023 granted by the trial court.

[4] As adjournment is sought, this Court wanted to know if the respondent has complied with bail conditions and as to whether respondent is regular in appearing in the hearings before the trial court. Learned counsel representing the State Counsel for NIA very fairly submitted that the respondent has complied with the bail conditions and is regularly appearing in the listings in the trial court in the last 2 and half (two and half) years.

[5] As both sides request for an adjournment citing personal inconvenience, let the matter stand over to 20.04.2026.

[6] List on 20.04.2026.'

Today, Mr. Thamchuiyo, learned counsel representing Mr. BR Sharma, learned CGSC (Central Government Standing Counsel) for appellant/NIA and Ms. G. Pushpa, learned counsel representing Ms. Savitri, learned counsel on record for lone respondent are before this Court (Physical Court)

Both learned counsel make a joint/common request for adjournment citing inconvenience/difficulties for counsel on both sides.

Afore-referred common/joint request is acceded to.

List under the same cause list caption i.e., 'HEARING' on 04.05.2026.

Owing to 18.02.2026 proceedings (extracted and reproduced supra) more particularly paragraph 4 thereat, let learned counsel for appellant/NIA get suitable instructions regarding giving a closure to captioned appeal.

List on 04.05.2026.'

[4] Adverting to penultimate paragraph of afore-referred 20.04.2026 proceedings, Mr. BR Sharma, learned CGSC in his usual fairness submitted that a closure can be given to captioned appeal as respondent has complied with bail conditions qua impugned order (to be noted, captioned appeal has been filed by NIA assailing an order of Trial Court granting bail to respondent) and respondent has been appearing before Trial Court regularly in the listings for more than 2 (two) and half years since grant of bail vide impugned order.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=tuqye3PhFs%2BBDn75ghiOpMaTEVCLU%2BVNvT95TOYQgn9FxnrRcoNveeXsq%2BGqU33P&caseno=Crl.A./6/2024&cCode=1&cino=MNHC010024682023&state_code=25&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.