Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3473 (JHR)

SATENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAY v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

Cr.M.P./3418/2025 · 2026-01-30

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:2521 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.3418 of 2025 ------ Satendra Kumar Upadhyay aged about 35 years, Son of Aasdev Upadhyay, resident of Village-Vishnupura, P.O.-Jogapur Kothi, P.S.-Jamo, District-Siwan, Bihar. … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Nagendra Kumar Tiwari, aged about 78 years, son of Shiv Balak Tiwari, Resident of Bari Co-operative, P.O.-Sector-12, P.S.-Sector- 12, District-Bokaro, Jharkhand. … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Ms. Seema Kashyap, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sunil Kr. Dubey, Addl.P.P. For the OP 2 : Ms. Aditee Dongrawat, Advocate : Mr. Manish Mishra, Advocate ------ Order No:-03 Dated:-30-01-2026 Heard the parties. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer for restoration of Cr.M.P. No.2552 of 2025 to its original file which stood dismissed for non-compliance of peremptory order dated 08.09.2025. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Cr.M.P. No.2552 of 2025 stood dismissed for non-compliance of peremptory order dated 08.09.2025 for filing the requisites peremptorily within two weeks. It is next submitted that due to inadvertence and miscalculation of the days, the petitioner could not file the said requisites within the stipulated time; which resulted in dismissal of the said Cr.M.P. No.2552 of 2025 for non-compliance of peremptory order dated 08.09.2025. It is next submitted that non-compliance of peremptory order dated 08.09.2025 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.2552 of 2025 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.2552 of 2025 be restored to its original file. Learned counsel appearing for the State and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has not raised any serious objection. Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the facts of this case, Cr.M.P. No.2552 of 2025 is directed to be restored to its original file at the same stage at which it was before its dismissal. Registry is directed to list Cr.M.P. No.2552 of 2025 before the concerned Bench after a week. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is disposed of accordingly. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 30/01/2026 Abhiraj/