Allowed

Haribhajan Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC11 Sept 2026Cr.M.P./1956/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court restored Cr.M.P.(Filing). No.14998 of 2025 to its original file after the respondent failed to appear despite valid service, accepting the petitioner's claim that dismissal was due to clerk negligence rather than deliberate non-compliance.

What did the court decide?

Cr.M.P.(Filing). No.14998 of 2025 is restored to its original file at the same stage it was before dismissal.

Haribhajan Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Jharkhand HC (2026)

¶1

( 2026:JHHC:27444 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.1956 of 2026

¶2

Haribhajan Yadav, aged about 50 years, S/o Madhusudan Gope,

¶3

Karun Kumar Gope, aged about 45 years, S/o Shri Sahdeo Gope, Both R/o Sabalpur & Bhuinphore, P.O.-K.G. Ashram, P.S.Govindpur, Dist.-Dhanbad.

¶4

… Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

Ram Pravesh Sharma, S/o Late Kanhaiya Prasad Sharma, having his place of work at Central Ayurvedic Pharmacy, P.O.-Chasnala, P.S.-Patherdih, Dist.-Dhanbad.

¶8

… Opposite Parties ------

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶10

For the Petitioners : Mr. Abhijeet Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sinha, Addl.P.P. ------

¶11

Order No:-03 Dated:-11-09-2026

¶12

Heard the parties.

¶13

Though, notice has validly been served upon the opposite party no.2 and yet no one turns up on behalf of the opposite party no.2.

¶14

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by the petitioners with the prayer for restoration of Cr.M.P. (Filing). No.14998 of 2025 to its original file which stood dismissed for non-compliance of peremptory order dated 23.03.2026.

¶15

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that Cr.M.P. (Filing). No.14998 of 2025 stood dismissed for non-compliance of peremptory order dated 23.03.2026 for removing the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter within three weeks. It is next submitted that due to negligence on the part of the advocate’s clerk, the petitioners could not remove the said defects within the stipulated time ; which resulted in dismissal of the said Cr.M.P. (Filing). No.14998 of 2025 for non-compliance of peremptory order dated 23.03.2026. It is next submitted that non-compliance of peremptory order dated 23.03.2026 was neither deliberate nor intentional. It is also submitted that the

¶16

petitioners have very good grounds to agitate in the said Cr.M.P. (Filing). No.14998 of 2025 and unless the same is restored to its original file, the petitioners will be highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that the Cr.M.P. (Filing). No.14998 of 2025 be restored to its original file.

¶17

Learned counsel appearing for the State has not raised any serious objection.

¶18

Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the facts of this case, Cr.M.P. (Filing). No.14998 of 2025 is directed to be restored to its original file at the same stage at which it was before its dismissal.

¶19

Registry is directed to list Cr.M.P. (Filing). No.14998 of 2025 before the concerned Bench after a week.

¶20

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶21

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶22

11/09/2026 Abhiraj/

Haribhajan Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Haribhajan Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases