Allowed¶22

Sunil Kumar Verma v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC13 Nov 2025Cr.M.P./547/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Restoration of anticipatory bail application dismissed for default; Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi; Cr.M.P. No. 547 of 2025; A.B.A. No. 10707 of 2023; inadvertent non-marking of list by counsel; bona fide mistake; senior citizen petitioners; no serious objection by State (Addl. P.P.); ends of justice; allowed on 13.11.2025.

What did the court decide?

Restoration of A.B.A. No. 10707 of 2023 to its original file and number ¶22

Why is it important?

Sunil Kumar Verma Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2025:JHHC:33876

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 547 of 2025

¶3

Sunil Kumar Verma, aged about 62 years, Son of Late Kuldeep Prasad Verma;

¶4

Surendra Kumar Verma, aged about 61 years, Son of Late Kuldeep Prasad Verma. Both Resident of Maha Laxmi Tower, Pee Pee Compound,

¶5

Main Road, P.O. – G.P.O., P.S. – Hindpiri, District – Ranchi, Jharkhand. ….. Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand.

¶8

Ashok Kumar, Son of Late Raghvendra Pratap, Resident of Hinoo, P.O. & P.S. – Doranda, District – Ranchi, Jharkhand.

¶9

….. Opp. Parties

¶10

---------

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶12

-------- For the Petitioners : Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Vineet Kumar Vashistha, Spl.P.P. ---------

¶13

Order No. 05/Dated: 13^th November, 2025

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶15

The instant Cr.M.P. has been filed for restoration of A.B.A. No. 10707 of 2023 to its original file and number, which was dismissed for default on 07.05.2025.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the case was listed on 07.05.2024 and the counsel for the petitioners inadvertently could not mark the list and due to non-marking of the list, the counsel for the petitioners could not appear before the Hon’ble Court on 07.05.2024, when the case was called out and the anticipatory bail application was dismissed for default.

¶17

It is further submitted that the petitioners are senior citizen and only due to bona fide mistake of learned counsel, the list could not be marked and the case was unattended. There is no fault on the part of the petitioners and the case is pending at the stage of “Appearance”, as such, the present petition may be allowed.

¶18

¶19

2025:JHHC:33876

¶20

Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State not raised any serious objection for restoration of A.B.A. No. 10707 of 2023.

¶21

Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners and for the ends of justice, A.B.A. No. 10707 of 2023 is restored to its original file.

¶22

Accordingly, this Cr.M.P. No.547 of 2025 is allowed.

¶23

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

¶24

November 13, 2025 Sunil/

¶25

Sunil Kumar Verma v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

Sunil Kumar Verma 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

Sudarshan Prakash Vs Tarun Anand

Mahabala Devi Vs Yogendra Mahto

Kumari Sarita Vs Anup Kumar Kushwaha

Khushi Kumari Vs Vishwajeet Prasad Bhagat

MD Firdos Ansari Vs Firdous Akhtar

Jai Shree Kumari Vs Vijay Oraon @ Vijay Tirkey