IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.2818 of 2025 ------ Ramesh Oraon, Aged about 56 years, Son of Late Ghurja Oraon, Resident of Kali Asthan Road, Bardhwan Compound, P.O. & P.S. Lalpur, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand at present 62 Circular Road, P.O. & P.S. – Lalpur, District- Ranchi. … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, P.O.- G.P.O., P.S.- Kotwali, District- Ranchi. 3. Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi, P.O.- G.P.O., P.S.- Kotwali, District- Ranchi. 4. City Superintendent of Police, Ranchi, P.O.- G.P.O., P.S.- Kotwali, District- Ranchi. 5. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Ranchi, Sadar, P.O. & P.S.- Sadar, District- Ranchi. 6. Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ranchi, P.O. – G.P.O., P.S.- Kotwali, District- Ranchi. 7. Officer-Incharge, Lalapur, Ranchi, P.O. & P.S. – Lalpur, District- Ranchi. 8. Raju Gope, Son of Balu Gope 9. Binod Gope, Son of Chhedi Gope, 10. Rajesh Gope @ Ramesh Gope, Son of Ramdhani Gope 11. Pravin Gope, Son of Shankar Gope, 12. Shankar Gope, Son of Rameshwar Gope. Private respondent no. 8 to 12 are resident of Karamtoli, (Ahirtoli), Near Rampiyari Hospital, P.O. & P.S. Lalpur, District- Ranchi. … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Tiwari, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sachin Kumar, AAG II For the OP No. 12 : Mr. Tarun Kr. Mahato, Advocate ------ Order No.04 Dated- 20.02.2026 Heard the parties. Perusal of the record reveals that this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition was listed before this Bench on 13.02.2026 and disposed of on the same day. Though notice was validly served upon the opposite party No.8 and the opposite party No.9 to 11 appeared through their Advocate who filed vakalatnama but no one turned upon on behalf of the opposite party No.08 to 11 in spite of repeated calls when this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition was called for hearing but Mr. Tarun Kumar Mahato, Advocate appeared on behalf of the opposite party No.12 only. Inadvertently, due to printing error, in the said order dated 13.02.2026 passed in Cr.M.P. No. 2818 of 2025 by this Court, the name of Mr. Tarun Kumar Mahato, Advocate has been shown to have been appearing on behalf of the opposite party No.8 to 12 instead of correct fact that ‘Mr. Tarun Kumar Mahato, Advocate appeared on behalf of the opposite party No.12 only’. Considering the aforesaid facts, the said order dated 13.02.2026 passed in Cr.M.P. No. 2818 of 2025 by this Court is modified by replacing the word “opposite party No.8 to 12” with the “opposite party No.12” at all places appearing in the said order of this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition and this order be treated as a part of the said order. Learned counsel for the petitioner pays Rs.5,000/- to the opposite party no.12 and the acknowledgement of which is received by opposite party no.12. In view of the payment of cost, list W.P. (Cr.) No. 178 of 2025 in due course. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 20.02.2026 Gunjan-