Allowed¶20

Rajendra Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC1 Aug 2025Cr.M.P./1782/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Restoration of criminal revision dismissed for non-prosecution; inadvertent absence of counsel on 23.06.2025; counsel ready to argue and undertook future care; State raised no objection; Cr. Revision (Filing) No. 10241 of 2025 restored to original file; Cr. M. P No. 1782 of 2025 allowed; High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi; Sanjay Prasad, J.; order dated 01.08.2025; petitioner Rajendra Yadav; opposite parties The State of Jharkhand and Sangeeta Devi; Office to place case as per Roster.

What did the court decide?

Restoration of Cr. Revision (Filing) No. 10241 of 2025 to its original file; Office directed to place the case as per Roster. ¶20

Rajendra Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

( 2025:JHHC:23392 )

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. M. P No. 1782 of 2025

¶3

….

¶4

Rajendra Yadav, aged about 29 years, son of Sudesh Yadav, resident of Village-Nawadhor, P.O: Jhabar, P.S: Satbarwa, District: Palamau (Jharkhand) ……Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

Sangeeta Devi, wife of Rajendra Yadav, D/o Sukul Yadav, resident of Village:- Nawadih, P.O: Patan, P.S: Patan, District: Palamau (Jharkhand) ……Opp. Parties

¶8

-----

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD

¶10

-----

¶11

For the Petitioner : Mr. Pradeep Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Vandana Bharti, A.P.P

¶12

Order No: 02/Dated: 01.08.2025

¶13

This Cr.M.P has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for restoration of Cr. Revision (Filing) No. 10241 of 2025, which was dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 23.06.2025 passed by this Court.

¶14

Heard Mr. Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Vandana Bharti, learned counsel for the State.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that due to inadvertence, the concerned counsel could not appear on 23.06.2025 before this Court and the said Cr. Revision (Filing) No. 10241 of 2025 was dismissed for non-prosecution. It is submitted that he is ready to argue the case and shall remain careful in future and hence, Cr. Revision (Filing) No. 10241 of 2025 may be restored.

¶16

Learned counsel for the State raised no objection.

¶17

¶18

( 2025:JHHC:23392 )

¶19

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State and in view of the averments made in Paragraph Nos. 6 to 8 of this Cr.M.P No. 1782 of 2025, the prayer for the restoration of Cr. Revision (Filing) No. 10241 of 2025 is allowed and Cr. Revision (Filing) No. 10241 of 2025 is restored to its original file.

¶20

Accordingly, Cr. M. P No. 1782 of 2025 is allowed.

¶21

Office to place this case as per Roster.

¶22

(Sanjay Prasad, J.)

¶23

Avinash/

¶24

Rajendra Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Yadav 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

Dr Guna Ram Mahatha Vs Vinoba Bhave University Through Its Registrar And Ors.

Kamla Prasad Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Sanchita Mukhopadhyay Vs the State of Jharkhand

M/S Tata Steel Ltd. Thr. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Jha, Head-Hrm (Legal and Rehabilitation) Tata Steel Ltd. Vs the State of Jharkhand Thr the Secretary, Dept. of Labour, Employment, Training N Skill Development

MD Sharifuddin Ansari Alias Sharifuddin Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ashok Kumar Tudu Vs the State of Jharkhand