P.K. SHASTRI vs STATE OF M.P.

The Supreme Court held that the Presiding Officer of the Sessions Court demonstrated reasonable cause for the delay in the disposal of Sessions Trial No.91/95, as outlined in the High Court's directive under Section 309 CrPC. The Court emphasized the importance of ensuring that the presence of witnesses is secured and acknowledged the additional responsibilities of the Additional Public Prosecutor, which contributed to the adjournments. Consequently, the Court set aside the High Court's order directing an entry in the C.R. of the Presiding Officer, affirming that the appellant had made genuine efforts to comply with the High Court's directions.