2026:JHHC:437 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. M.P No. 2549 of 2025 --------------- Raju @ Rajesh Goyal aged about-50 years, S/o Late Siyaram Goyal, R/o 8/404, Bhairon Bazar, Balanganj, Agra (U.P). ........Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through CBI ...... Opposite Party CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD For the Petitioner : Ms. Omiya Anusha, Advocate For the O.P. : Mr. Prashant Pallav, ASGI Mr. Ayush, AC to ASGI Order No.06/Dated:7th January, 2026 1. The instant petition has been filed under section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 for restoration of Cr. Revision No.76 of 2005 to its original file which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 09.05.2025. 2. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that Cr. Revision No.76 of 2005 has been filed against the judgment dated 25.08.2004 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-X, Dhanbad in Criminal Appeal No.119 of 2003 dismissing the appeal and confirming the conviction and sentence dated 26.08.2003 of the petitioner passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in Case No. RC 10(S)/92(D) by which the petitioner has been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 2 ½ years and a fine of Rs.1000/- under sections 420/511 of the IPC, for the offence under section 471 of the IPC imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs.500/-, for the offence under section 120-B of the IPC imprisonment for 2 ½ years and a fine of Rs.1000/- and for the offence under section 10(a) (e) of the Central Excise Act imprisonment for six months and a fine of Rs.500/-, all the sentences shall run concurrently and in default of payment of fine imprisonment of SI for six months has been awarded. 3. It has further been submitted on behalf of the petitioner by referring paragraph no.4 to 11 of the present petition that due to non-appearance of the learned counsel for the petitioner on 09.05.2025, Cr. Revision No.76 of 2005 was dismissed for non-prosecution as the concerned counsel was on leg at other Hon’ble Court which was neither deliberate nor intentional 2026:JHHC:437 2 and, as such, Cr. Revision No.76 of 2005 may be restored to its original file. 4. Notice has been issued to the Opposite Party-CBI whereupon the learned Addl.SGI appeared on behalf of the opposite party and raised no objection, rather a statement has been made that the instant petition for restoration may be allowed so that Cr. Revision No.76 of 2005 may be decided on its own merit. 5. Considering such submission and after being satisfied with the cause shown in the instant petition, the present petition for restoration being Cr. M.P. No.2549 of 2025 is allowed and Cr. Revision No.76 of 2005 is restored to its original file. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) Dated:07.01.2026 Sudhir