[2026:JHHC:11116] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.428 of 2026 ------ 1. Md. Imitiyaz @ Md. Imitiyaz Ansari (aged about 35 years) son of Shaban Ansari, 2. Shaban Ansari (aged about 55 years) son of late Teju Mian, 3. Md. Mustak @ Mustaque @ Guddu (aged about 30 years) son of Shaban Ansari, 4. Nazma @ Nazma Khatoon (aged about 50 years) wife of Shaban Ansari, All petitioners are the resident of village – Momin Mohulla, P.O.- Pelawal, P.S.- Pelawal, District- Hazaribag … Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Shabnam Praveen daughter of Shamim Ansari and wife of Md. Imitiyaz Ansari, resident of village – Bhooli, A-Block, Quarter No.- 100, P.O.- Bhooli, P.S.- Bhooli, O.P., District- Dhanbad … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Ram Lakhan Yadav, Advocate For the State : Mr. Prabhu Dayal Agrawal, Spl. P. P. For the O.P. No.2 : None ------ Order No:-03 Dated:-17-04-2026 Heard the parties. 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. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed by the petitioners with the prayer for restoration of Cr.M.P. No.30087 of 2024 (Filing No.) to its original file which stood dismissed for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 13.11.2025 passed by this Court. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that Cr.M.P. No.30087 of 2024 (Filing No.) stood dismissed for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 13.11.2025 passed by this Court to remove the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter. It is next submitted that as the matter had slipped from the mind due to flu, hence, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter, could not be removed within the stipulated time which resulted in dismissal of the said Cr.M.P. No.30087 of 2024 (Filing No.) for non-compliance of the said peremptory order dated 13.11.2025 passed by this Court. It is next submitted that non-compliance of the said peremptory order dated 13.11.2025 was neither deliberate nor intentional. It is also submitted that the petitioners have very good grounds to agitate in the said Cr.M.P. No.30087 of 2024 (Filing No.) 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.30087 of 2024 (Filing No.) be restored to its original file. Learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State has not raised any serious objection. Considering the facts of the case and the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, Cr.M.P. No.30087 of 2024 (Filing No.) 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.30087 of 2024 (Filing No.) before the concerned Bench after a week. This criminal miscellaneous petition is disposed of accordingly. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated-17.04.2026-Animesh/