( 2025:JHHC:28037 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.1530 of 2025 ------ 1. Sunil Pahan, aged about 45 years son of Late Rampahan 2. Charls Pahan, aged about 27 son of Late Telga Pahan, 3. Sanika Pahan, aged about 43 years, son of Late Ram Pahan, 4. Munna Pahan @ Sohrai Pahan, aged about 43 years, son of Rakhal Pahan. 5. Rakhal Pahan, aged about 65 years son of Late Sanika Pahan, 6. Uday Pahan, aged about 29 years son of Dandsar Pahan, 7. Sukhram Pahan, 56 years son of Lohar Singh Pahan, All above Resident of Village Mahuwatoli, P.O. & P.S.-Khunti, District-Khunti. … Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Usha Mandu, W/o Birsingh Munda, Resident of Village Amritpur, P.O. & P.S.-Khunti, District-Khunti. … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. S.K. Vishwakarma, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Addl.P.P. For the OP 2 : Mr. Vishal Kr. Rai, Advocate ------ Order No:-03 Dated:-12-09-2025 Heard the parties. This Cr.M.P. has been filed with a prayer for restoration of Cr.M.P. No.1533 of 2024 along with I.A. No.2238 of 2024. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners filed Criminal Misc. Petition No.1533 of 2024 for quashing and setting aside the order dated 16.04.2024 in Criminal Revision No.01 of 2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Khunti. The Cr.M.P. No.1533 of 2024 was listed before this Court on 12.06.2025, but the counsel for the petitioners could not appear because the petitioners engaged senior lawyer for argument and file was taken from the Advocate on record. After dismissal of the case, the counsel for the petitioners of Cr.M.P. No.1533 of 2024 have returned the file, hence, this petition is filed for restoration. Therefore, it is lastly submitted that the prayer as prayed for in this Cr.M.P. be allowed. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the state and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 on the other hand vehemently oppose the prayer and submit that there is absolutely no justifiable reason for the petitioners, for not to appear before this Court on 12.06.2025, when the case was called out for hearing, if the petitioners have taken the file from the lawyer, they have done so at their risk and peril, but there is absolutely no reason assigned, as to why the petitioners did not appear before this Court on 12.06.2025. Hence, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P. being without any merit be dismissed. Having heard the submissions made at the bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that it is the admitted case of the petitioners that the petitioners were well aware that the Cr.M.P. No.1533 of 2024 was listed on 12.06.2025 but the petitioners neither engaged any lawyer nor appeared in person without any plausible reason. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view as no valid reason has been assigned by the petitioners as to why they did not appear before this Court on 12.06.2025 either himself or by engaging any lawyer, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case to restore Cr.M.P. No.1533 of 2024. Accordingly, this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, is dismissed. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Abhiraj/