IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.148 of 2025 ------ Pradeep Karmahe @ Pradeep Kumar Karmahe, aged about 32 years, S/O Late Jaikrishan Karmahe, Resident of Laxmipur Chowk, P.O.- Deoghar, P.S.- Deoghar (Town), Dist.- Deoghar … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Ankita Anand, W/O Pradeep Karmahe @ Pradeep Kumar Karmahe, R/o Rampur, P.O. & P.S.- Mohanpur, Dist.- Deoghar … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Shishir Raj, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kr. Mishra, Addl.P.P. For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Pran Pranay, Advocate ------ Order No:-03 Dated:-21-03-2025 Heard the parties. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer for restoration of Cr.M.P. No.2955 of 2024 to its original file which stood dismissed for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 21.11.2024 passed by this Court. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Cr.M.P. No.2955 of 2024 stood dismissed for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 21.11.2024 passed by this Court to file the requisites of service of notice upon the opposite party No.2. It is next submitted that due to negligence on the part of the advocate’s clerk, the requisites of service of notice upon the opposite party No.2 could not be filed within the stipulated time which resulted in dismissal of the said Cr.M.P. No.2955 of 2024. It is next submitted that non- compliance of the said order dated 21.11.2024 within the stipulated time was neither deliberate nor intentional. It is also submitted that the petitioner has very good grounds to agitate in the said Cr.M.P. No.2955 of 2024 and unless the same is restored to its original file, the petitioner will be highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that the Cr.M.P. No.2955 of 2024 be restored to its original file. Learned counsel appearing for the State has not raised any serious objection. Learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner for restoration of the said Cr.M.P. No.2955 of 2024 and submits that the opposite party No.2 will unnecessarily be harassed if the same is restored to its original file, hence, the opposite party No.2 be compensated adequately. Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, Cr.M.P. No.2955 of 2024 is directed to be restored to its original file at the same stage at which it was before its dismissal subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- by the petitioner to the opposite party No.2 through his counsel appearing in the record within four weeks from the date of this order. Registry is directed to list Cr.M.P. No.2955 of 2024 before the concerned Bench after four weeks only if the petitioner files the proof of payment of the cost of Rs.5,000/- to the opposite party No.2 though his counsel appearing in the record within four weeks from the date of this order failing which this conditional order shall not be given effect to and Cr.M.P. No.2955 of 2024 shall remain dismissed. This criminal miscellaneous petition is disposed of accordingly. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Animesh/