Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 26348 (JHR)

MANOJ KUMAR PODDAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

Cr.M.P./3349/2019 · 2025-04-25

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2025:JHHC:12471 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.3349 of 2019 ------ Manoj Kumar Poddar, aged about 31 years, son of Baidyanath Poddar @ Baidnath Poddar, resident of 138A, Dindli Basti, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O.- Adityapur, P.S.-Adityapur, Distt.-Seraikella-Kharsawan (Jharkhand). … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Dhananjay Kumar Singh, aged about 45 years, son of Chandrabhan Singh, Resident of Barigora, P.O.-Sarjamda, P.S.-Parsudih, Jamshedpur, Distt.-East Singhbhum (Jharkhand) 831002. … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Bhola Nath Rajak, Advocate For the State : Mr. Saket Kumar, Addl.P.P. ------ Order No:-07 Dated:-25-04-2025 Heard the parties. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer for restoration of Acq. App.(C). No.15 of 2019 to its original file which stood dismissed for non-compliance of peremptory order dated 22.08.2019. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Acq. App.(C). No.15 of 2019 stood dismissed for non-compliance of peremptory order dated 22.08.2019 for removing the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter peremptorily within two weeks. It is next submitted that due to inadvertence on the part of the advocate’s clerk, the learned counsel for the petitioner could not remove the defects within the stipulated time; which resulted in dismissal of the said Acq. App.(C). No.15 of 2019 for non- compliance of peremptory order dated 22.08.2019. It is next submitted that non-compliance of peremptory order dated 22.08.2019 was neither deliberate nor intentional. It is also submitted that the petitioner has very good grounds to agitate in the said Acq. App.(C). No.15 of 2019 and unless the same is restored to its original file, the petitioner will be highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that the Acq. App.(C). No.15 of 2019 be restored to its original file. Learned counsel appearing for the State has not raised any serious objection. Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the facts of this case, Acq. App.(C). No.15 of 2019 is directed to be restored to its original file at the same stage at which it was before its dismissal. Registry is directed to list Acq. App.(C). No.15 of 2019 before the concerned Bench after a week. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is disposed of accordingly. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Abhiraj/