( 2026:JHHC:6859 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.3672 of 2025 ------ Markush Malto, aged about 36 years old, son of Bara Surja Paharia, resident of Village-Suarmari, P.O. & P.S.-Mirzachowki, District- Sahibganj. … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Sushila Paharin wife of Markush Paharia, resident of Village- Suarmari, P.O. & P.S.-Mirzachowki, District-Sahibganj at present resident of Village-Guttibera, P.O. & P.S.-Mirzachouki, District- Sahibganj. … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Sabyasanchi, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Addl.P.P. For the OP 2 : Md. Yasir Arafat, Advocate ------ Order No:-03 Dated:-13-03-2026 Heard the parties. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer for restoration of Cr.M.P. No.2454 of 2025 to its original file which stood dismissed for non-compliance of peremptory order dated 12.09.2025. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Cr.M.P. No.2454 of 2025 stood dismissed for non-compliance of peremptory order dated 12.09.2025 for filing the supplementary affidavit peremptorily within four weeks. It is next submitted that due to unavoidable circumstances, the petitioner could not file the supplementary affidavit within the stipulated time; which resulted in dismissal of the said Cr.M.P. No.2454 of 2025 for non-compliance of peremptory order dated 12.09.2025. It is next submitted that non- compliance of peremptory order dated 12.09.2025 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.2454 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.2454 of 2025 be restored to its original file. Learned counsel appearing for the State has not raised any serious objection. Learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner for restoration of the said Cr.M.P. No.2454 of 2025 and submits 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 petitioner, Cr.M.P. No.2454 of 2025 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.5,000/- by the petitioner to the opposite party No.2 through his counsel appearing in the record within three weeks from the date of this order. Registry is directed to list Cr.M.P. No.2454 of 2025 before the concerned Bench after three weeks only if the petitioner files the proof of payment of the cost of Rs.5,000/- to the opposite party No.2 through his counsel appearing in the record within three weeks from the date of this order failing which this conditional order shall not be given effect to and Cr.M.P. No.2454 of 2025 shall stand dismissed. This criminal miscellaneous petition is disposed of accordingly. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 13/03/2026 Abhiraj/