Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 7966 (JHR)

ASHWANI PARMANIK @ ASHWANI KUMAR PARMANIK v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

Cr.M.P./1255/2026 · 2026-05-01

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:12941 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 1255 of 2026 ------ 1. Ashwani Pramanik @ Ashwani Kumar Pramanik, aged about 36 years. 2. Chandrashekhar Pramanik, aged about 40 years Both are sons of Thakur Das Pramanik, Resident of Village – Gosaidih, P.O. –Kanchi, P.S. –Bundu, District –Ranchi, Jharkhand. .... .... …. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Director General of Police, Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. –Dhurwa, P.S. –Jagarnathpur, District –Ranchi. 3. The Inspector General of Police, P.O. –Doranda, P.S. – Doranda, District –Ranchi. 4. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. –Dhurwa, P.S. –Jagarnathpur, District – Ranchi. 5. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi, P.O. –G.P.O., P.S. –Kotwali, District –Ranchi. 6. The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bundu, P.O.+P.S. –Bundu, District –Ranchi. 7. The Officer-In-Charge, Bundu Police Station, P.O.+P.S. – Bundu, District –Ranchi. .... .... .... Opp. Parties ------ CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Thakur, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jai Prakash, AAG-IA : Ms. Omiya Anusha, AC to AAG-IA ------ Order No.06 Dated- 01.05.2026 Heard the parties. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed at the instance of the petitioners for restoration of W.P.(Cr). No.531 of 2024 to its original file. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that W.P.(Cr). No.531 of 2024 was dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 18.03.2025. It is next submitted that as the petitioners took ‘No Objection’ from their earlier counsel and fresh power was yet to be filed by the petitioners through the new counsel, hence no one appeared on the call of the case, resulting in dismissal of the same. It is then submitted that the non-appearance of the learned counsel for the petitioners in the said W.P.(Cr). No.531 of 2024 was neither deliberate nor intentional. It is next submitted that the petitioners have very good grounds to agitate in the said W.P.(Cr). No.531 of 2024 and unless W.P.(Cr). No.531 of 2024 is restored to its original file, the petitioners will be highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that W.P.(Cr). No.531 of 2024 be restored to its original file. Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, W.P.(Cr). No.531 of 2024 is restored to its original file to the stage at which, it was before its dismissal. List W.P.(Cr). No.531 of 2024 under the appropriate heading after a week. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 01.05.2026 Sonu-