Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 13517 (JHR)

RATNESHWAR PRASAD CHOURASIA ALIAS RATAN KUMAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

Cr.M.P./2287/2025 · 2026-05-08

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:13925 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 2287 of 2025 ------ 1. Ratneshwar Prasad Chourasia @ Ratan Kumar, aged about 67 years, son of Late Mahendra Prasad Chourasia, 2. Nutan Kumari, Aged about 61 years, wife of Ratneshwar Prasad Chourasia @ Ratan Kumar, 3. Nawendu Kumar, Aged about 41 years, son of Ratneshwar Prasad Chourasia @ Ratan Kumar, 4. Nishant Kumar, Aged about 37 years, son of Ratneshwar Prasad Chourasia @ Ratan Kumar, All residents of Ramasi, P.O. Sakrama, P.S. Sanahoula, District- Bhagalpur (State-Bihar). … Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Rashmi Rekha, wife of Sri Nawendu Kumar, Daughter of Sri Ashok Kumar, Resident of Mukti Saran Lane, Lalpur, P.O. & P.S. Lalpur, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Sheo Kr. Singh, Advocate : Mr. Vishwajeet Kr. Tiwari, Advocate For the State : Mr. S.K. Tiwari, Advocate For O.P. No.2 : None ------ Order No.04 Dated- 08.05.2026 Heard the parties. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed at the instance of the petitioners for restoration of Cr.M.P. No. 2886 of 2021 to its original file. Though notice has validly been served upon the opposite party no.2 yet no one turns up on behalf of the opposite party no.2 in-spite of repeated calls. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Cr.M.P. No. 2886 of 2021 was dismissed for non-prosecution. It is next submitted that as the counsel for the petitioners could not mark the case in the cause list, hence, he could not appear before this Court when the case was called out and the same resulted in dismissal of Cr.M.P. No. 2886 of 2021. It is next submitted that the petitioners have very good grounds to agitate in the said Cr.M.P. No. 2886 of 2021 and unless Cr.M.P. No. 2886 of 2021 is restored to its original file, the petitioners will be highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that Cr.M.P. No. 2886 of 2021 be restored to its original file. Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, Cr.M.P. No. 2886 of 2021 is restored to its original file to the stage at which, it was before its dismissal. List Cr.M.P. No. 2886 of 2021 under the appropriate heading before the appropriate bench after a week. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 08.05.2026 Gunjan-