Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 11609 (JHR)

DEEPAK KUMAR ALIAS DEEPAK KUMAR SAH v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH THE SECRETARY HOME AFFAIRS

Cr.M.P./143/2026 · 2026-02-04

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

--1-- ( 2026:JHHC:2986 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 143 of 2026 ---- Deepak Kumar @ Deepak, aged about 37 years, son of Sri Beni Saw @ Beni Sao, resident of village- Oriya, P.O.- Oriya, P.S.- Muffassil, District- Hazaribagh .... Petitioner -- Versus -- 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Home Affairs, Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District- Ranchi-834004 2. The Director General of Police, Government of Jharkhand, Rani Kothi, Neapl House, Doranda, P.O. & P.S.-Doranda, District-Ranchi. 3. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, North Chhotanagpur Range, Hazaribagh, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh, District-Hazaribagh. 4. The Superintendent of Police, Hazaribagh, P.O. & P.S.-Hazaribagh, District-Hazaribagh 5. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sadar, Hazaribagh, P.O. & P.S.- Hazaribagh, District-Hazaribagh 6. The Inspector of Police, Sadar, Circle Hazaribagh, P.O. & P.S.- Hazaribagh, District-Hazaribagh 7. The Officer In-Charge, Korrah Police Station, P.O. & P.S.-Korrah, District-Hazaribagh 8. Sri Khirsto Pal Mundu, Assistant Sub Inspector-cum-Investigating Officer, Korra Police Station, P.O. & P.S.-Korrah, District-Hazaribagh .... Opposite Parties ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Mr. Arpit Khandalwel, Advocate Mr. Kumar Rahul, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Anuj Kumar Trivedi, AC to SC-VII ---- 02/04.02.2026 This petition has been filed for restoration of W.P.(Cr.) No. 278 of 2019 to its original file, which was dismissed for non- compliance of order dated 31.3.2022. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to inadvertence on the part of the conducting counsel, the defects have not been removed within the stipulated time. He next submits that other reasons have been disclosed in this Cr.M.P. 3. Learned counsel for the State has got no serious objection, if the aforesaid writ application is restored in its original file. 4. In view of above submissions and also in view of the --2-- averments made in the petition, the Court finds that sufficient cause has been made out for the restoration of W.P.(Cr.) No.278 of 2019. As such W.P.(Cr.) No.278 of 2019 is hereby restored to its original file. 5. This petition is disposed of accordingly. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated 04.02.2026 Nandini/ Uploaded on: 07.02.2026