[2026:JHHC:12141] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.334 of 2026 ------ 1. Sanjeev Singh, aged about 55 years, Son of Kameshwar Prasad Singh, 2. Ratna Singh, Aged about 51 years, Wife of Sanjeev Singh. 3. Smiti Singh @ Smiti, Aged about 24 years, daughter of Sanjeev Singh. All resident of Flat No. 202, RAdha Govind Enclave, N- 4/42F, IRC, Village, Bhubaneshwar, P.O. & P.S. – Kharda, District- Kharda, Pin – 751015 (Odisha). … Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Kumud Kanchan, daughter of Sri Ram Binay Singh, aged about 39 years, resident of Cooperative Colony, P.O. – Koyla Nagar, P.S.- Saraidhela, District- Dhanbad, Jharkhand. … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Kumar Harsh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Indranil Bhaduri, SC IV Mr. Rahul Kamlesh, AC to SC IV For the O.P. No.2 : None ------ Order No:-03 Dated:-24-04-2026 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 site of repeated calls. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by the petitioners with the prayer for restoration of Cr.M.P. No. 1710 of 2025 to its original file which stood dismissed for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 31.10.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Cr.M.P. No. 1710 of 2025 was dismissed for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 31.10.2025. It is next submitted that the petitioner was directed to file requisites for service of notice upon the opposite party No.2 by speed post as well as under process of the court within two weeks from 31.10.2025 but due to some bonafide reasons, the said requisites could not been filed within the stipulated period; which resulted in dismissal of the said Cr.M.P. No. 1710 of 2025 for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 31.10.2025. It is then submitted that non- compliance of the peremptory order dated 31.10.2025 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. 1710 of 2025 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. 1710 of 2025 be restored to its original file. Learned counsel for the State has not raised any serious objection to the prayer of the petitioners. Considering the facts of the case and the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, Cr.M.P. No. 1710 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. 1710 of 2025 before the appropriate Bench after a week. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is disposed of accordingly. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:- 24.04.2026 Saroj/