[2026:JHHC:22003] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.1137 of 2026 ------ 1. Amrit Lal Gupta, aged about 64 years, 2. Chhotelal Gupta, aged about 72 years, 3. Bharat Lal Gupta @ Bharat, aged about 62 years 4. Jawaharlal Gupta @ Jawahar Lal Gupta, aged about 66 years All are sons of Mewalal Saw, resident of 135/107, Girish Road, Buleremath, P.O. and P.S. Belurmath, District Howrah (West Bengal) … Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Sandeep Kumar Agarwal, S/o Maam Chand Agarwal, R/o Railway Crossing, P.O. Chirkunda, P.S. Chirkunda, District Dhanbad. … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Pradyot Chatterjee, Advocate For the State : Mr. Suraj Deo Munda, Addl.P.P. For the O.P. No.2 : Ms. Mahika Rani, Advocate ------ Order No:-03 Dated:-24-07-2026 Heard the parties. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed with the prayer for restoration of Cr.M.P. No.3369 of 2018 to its original file which stood dismissed for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 16.10.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Cr.M.P. No.3369 of 2018 was dismissed for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 16.10.2025. It is next submitted that on 16.10.2025, the prayer for time was allowed to the petitioners subject to deposit of Rs.2,000/- by the petitioners with the Jharkhand State Legal Services Authority (JHALSA) within four weeks from the date of that order but inadvertently, the said deposit could not be made within the stipulated period; which resulted in dismissal of Cr.M.P. No.3369 of 2018 for non- compliance of the peremptory order dated 16.10.2025. Now the petitioners have made the said deposit; the copy of which has been annexed with this petition. It is next submitted that non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 16.10.2025 was neither deliberate nor intentional. It is further submitted that the petitioners have very good grounds to agitate in the said Cr.M.P. No.3369 of 2018 and unless the same is restored to its original file, the petitioners will be highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that the Cr.M.P. No.3369 of 2018 be restored to its original file. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No.2 submits that the petitioners are deliberately delaying the disposal of the Cr.M.P. No.3369 of 2018. It is next submitted 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 petitioners, Cr.M.P. No.3369 of 2018 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.10,000/- by the petitioners to the opposite No.2 through his counsel appearing in the record and the petitioners are directed to file the proof of the payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- by the petitioners to the opposite No.2 through his counsel appearing in the record within eight weeks from the date of this order; failing which, this conditional order shall not be given effect to and Cr.M.P. No.3369 of 2018 shall remain dismissed. The Registry is directed to list Cr.M.P. No.3369 of 2018 after eight weeks to its original file before the appropriate Bench if the learned counsel for the petitioners files the proof of the payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- by the petitioners to the opposite party No.2 through his counsel appearing in the record within eight weeks from the date of this order. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is disposed of accordingly. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:- 24.07.2026 Saroj/