Dismissed¶22

Vinita Mishra v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC12 Nov 2025Acq. App.(C)/22/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Acquittal appeal (Acq. Appeal (C) No. 22 of 2025), Jharkhand High Court, decided 12.11.2025 by Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.: 28-day filing-delay condoned (I.A. No.1089 of 2025); acquittal appeal dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file criminal revision; certified copies substitutable with photocopies. Parties: Vinita Mishra (appellant) v. State of Jharkhand and Deepak Kumar (respondents). Keywords: delay condonation, acquittal appeal, withdrawal, criminal revision.

What did the court decide?

Acquittal appeal dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a criminal revision; certified copies of documents may be substituted with their photocopies. ¶22

Vinita Mishra Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

( 2025:JHHC:33802 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Acq. Appeal (C) No. 22 of 2025

¶2

Vinita Mishra, aged about 51 years, wife of Saligram Mishra @ Shaligram Mishra, resident of Sidhi Vinayak Apartment, PS-1, Plot No.2, P.O. & P.S.-Sitaramdera, Town-Jamshedpur, Dist..... .... …. East Singhbhum Appellant

¶3

Versus

¶4

The State of Jharkhand

¶5

Deepak Kumar, son of Rateshwar Singh, resident of Adityapur, IOMF-III, S-2/22, (MIG-2/22) Dindly, Adityapur, P.O. & P.S.-Adityapur, Dist.-Seraikela, Kharsawan

¶6

.... .... .... Respondents

¶7

------

¶8

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶9

For the Petitioner	: Mr. Sourav Kumar, Advocate
	: Mr. Parambir Singh Bajaj, Advocate
For the State	: Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P.
For Resp. No.2	: Mr. Jitendra N. Upadhyay, Advocate

¶10

------

¶11

Order No.03 Dated- 12.11.2025

¶12

I.A. No.1089 of 2025

¶13

Heard the parties.

¶14

This interlocutory application has been filed with the prayer to condone the delay of 28 days in filing this instant acquittal appeal.

¶15

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellantpetitioner that the appellant was not at Jamshedpur and after coming back to Jamshedpur, he got to know that the impugned judgment has been passed and after that he contacted with the lawyer but in the meanwhile, the delay of 28 days has occurred. It is further submitted that the appellant-petitioner has very good grounds to agitate in this acquittal appeal and the delay was neither deliberate nor intentional. It is lastly submitted that unless the delay in filing this instant acquittal appeal is condoned, the appellant-petitioner will be highly prejudiced.

¶16

Considering the aforesaid facts, the delay of 28 days in filing this instant acquittal appeal is condoned.

¶17

This interlocutory application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶18

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶19

Acq. Appeal (C) No. 22 of 2025

¶20

Heard the parties.

¶21

The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this acquittal appeal with liberty to file criminal revision.

¶22

This acquittal appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.

¶23

The certified copy of the documents may be substituted with their photocopies.

¶24

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶25

12.11.2025 Sonu/Gunjan-

Vinita Mishra v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinita Mishra v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajeev Kumar Alias Rajiv Kumar Alias Pappu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kishore Kumar Alias Kishore Kumar Charan Pahadi Alias Mintu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Umesh Mahto Alias Jhalak Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Nikky Verma Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Abul Kaish Vs the State of Jharkhand

Nirmala Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand