( 2026:JHHC:12919 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 479 of 2026 ------ Avinash Narjyoti, aged about 37 years, son of Shree Naresh Prasad, Permanent Address-Tracker Stand, Helajot, Nr. Shiv Mandir, P.O. & P.S.-Jhajha, Dist.-Jamui (Bihar); At present- Bank of India, Zonal Office, Devdoot Complex, Radha Rani Sinha Road, Adampur, P.O.-Bhagalpur Town, P.S.-Jogsar, At & Dist.-Bhagalpur (Bihar) 812002 … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Mini Kumari @ Mini, wife of Sri Avinash Narjyoti, d/o late Suresh Lal Barnwal, resident of Sahana Road, Nr. Gandhi Chowk, P.O. & P.S.-Koderma Town, Dist.-Koderma … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Mitul Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kr. Mishra, Addl. P.P. For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate : Ms. Sonal Sodhani, Advocate ------ Order No.03 Dated- 01.05.2026 Heard the parties. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed at the instance of the petitioner for restoration of Cr.M.P. No. 2335 of 2025 to its original file. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Cr.M.P. No. 2335 of 2025 was dismissed for non-compliance of peremptory order of filing requisites. It is next submitted that due to confusion, the said requisites could not be filed within the stipulated time and the same resulted in dismissal of Cr.M.P. No. 2335 of 2025. It is then submitted that non-compliance of peremptory order was neither deliberate nor intentional. It is further submitted that the petitioner has very good grounds to agitate in this Cr.M.P. No. 2335 of 2025 and unless Cr.M.P. No. 2335 of 2025 is restored to its original file, the petitioner will be highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that Cr.M.P. No. 2335 of 2025 be restored to its original file. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that the petitioner is deliberately delaying the matter and harassing the opposite party no.2 by lingering the same. Hence, the opposite party no.2 be adequately compensated with costs. Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, Cr.M.P. No. 2335 of 2025 is restored to its original file to the stage at which, it was before its dismissal subject to payment of costs of Rs.10,000/- by the petitioner to the opposite party no.2 through the counsel appearing in the record within two weeks, failing which, this conditional order shall not be given effect to and this criminal miscellaneous petition shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Bench. In case, the petitioner files the proof of payment of costs of Rs.10,000/- by the petitioner to the opposite party no.2 through the counsel appearing in the record within two weeks, list Cr.M.P. No. 2335 of 2025 under the appropriate heading after a week before the appropriate Bench. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 01.05.2026 Gunjan-