Kashmiru & Ors vs. Jagdish Chand Cr.MP No. 2175 of 2026 in Cr. Appeal No. 412 of 2012 Reserved on 01.07.2026. 07.07.2026 Present: Mr Ramesh Sharma, Advocate for the applicant. Ms Ranjana Pathania, Advocate, vice Mr Imran Khan, Advocate for the petitioner. Cr.MP No. 2175 of 2026 The applicant has filed the present application to recall the order dated 29.04.2026 vide which the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. It has been asserted that the Court had dismissed the appeal for non- prosecution after finding that the appellant was not interested in pursuing the matter when the learned counsel was not ready to argue the matter, and there was no representation on behalf of the appellant on the earlier dates of hearing. The appellant had changed his counsel, and the complete record was not available with the learned counsel. There was no intention to linger on the matter. Hence, it was prayed that the present application be allowed and the order be recalled. 2. No reply to the application was filed. 3. I have heard Mr Ramesh Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant and Ms Ranjana Pathania, learned counsel vice Mr Imran Khan, learned counsel for the respondent. 4. Mr Ramesh Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant, submitted that he did not have the complete record, and the matter could not be argued. There was no willful default on the appellant’s part. Hence, he prayed that the present application be allowed and the order passed by this Court be recalled. He relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Yashypal Singh vs. State of Uttarakhand & Ors. SLP (Criminal) arising out of Diary No(s) 42358/2025 decided on 15.09.2025 in support of his submission. 5. Ms Ranjana Pathania, learned counsel for the respondent, did not make any submission. 6. I have given a considerable thought to the submissions made at the bar and have gone through the records carefully. 7. The Hon’ble Supreme Court held in Yashpal (supra) that a petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. could not have been dismissed for non-prosecution, and when the application for recall of the order was filed, the Court should have allowed it. In the present case, the Court had dismissed the appeal against acquittal for non- prosecution when there was no representation on behalf of the appellant on 26.02.2026 and 25.03.2026, and the learned Counsel was not ready to argue the matter on 29.04.2026. Since, as per the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Yashpal (supra), the appeal could not have been dismissed for non-prosecution and the application for recall of the order has to be allowed, therefore, the present application is allowed, and the order dated 29.04.2026 is ordered to be recalled. 8. Application stands disposed of. Cr. Appeal No. 412 of 2012 9. The appeal has been ordered to be restored as per the order passed in Cr.MP No. 2175 of 2026. The matter be listed for hearing in due course. (Rakesh Kainthla) Judge 7th July, 2026 (Nikita)