Remanded

Prahlad Singh v. State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC11 Sept 2026Cr.M.P./2507/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand allowed the restoration of Cr.M.P. No.895 of 2022 to its original file at the pre-dismissal stage. The dismissal was due to non-compliance with a peremptory order by the fourth week, which the petitioner explained was caused by a bona fide mistake of the advocate's clerk. The court directed the registry to list the matter before the concerned Bench after a week.

What did the court decide?

Restoration of Cr.M.P. No.895 of 2022 to its original file at the stage prior to its dismissal; listing before the concerned Bench after a week.

Prahlad Singh Vs State of Jharkhand — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Jharkhand HC (2026)

¶1

( 2026:JHHC:27451 )

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.2507 of 2026

¶3

Prahlad Singh, aged about 57 years son of late Munna Singh, Resident of Village Marchoi, P.O.-Marchoi and P.S.-Satgawan, District-Koderma.

¶4

… Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

Nitish Kumar, Officer In-charge, Satgawan S/o Ashok Kumar Palit, aged about 28 years, R/o Village-Pinjor, P.O.-Pinjor, P.O.Paras, Dist.-Jehanabad, Bihar, at present P.S.-Satgawan, Dist.Koderma.

¶8

… Opposite Parties ------

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶10

------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Amritanshu Singh, Advocate For the State : Ms. Nehala Sharmin, Spl.P.P. For the OP 2 : Mr. Aman Shekhar, Advocate ------

¶11

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

¶12

Heard the parties.

¶13

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer for restoration of Cr.M.P. No.895 of 2022 to its original file which stood dismissed for non-compliance of peremptory order dated 13.02.2026.

¶14

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Cr.M.P. No.895 of 2022 stood dismissed for non-compliance of peremptory order dated 13.02.2026 for depositing the payment of Rs.2,000/- with the Jharkhand State Legal Services Authority (JHALSA) peremptorily within four weeks. It is next submitted that due to bona fide mistake on the part of the advocate’s clerk, the petitioner could not deposit the said amount within the stipulated time ; which resulted in dismissal of the said Cr.M.P. No.895 of 2022 for non-compliance of peremptory order dated 13.02.2026. It is next submitted that noncompliance of peremptory order dated 13.02.2026 was neither deliberate nor intentional. It is also submitted that the petitioner has very good grounds to agitate in the said Cr.M.P. No.895 of 2022 and unless the

¶15

same is restored to its original file, the petitioner will be highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that the Cr.M.P. No.895 of 2022 be restored to its original file.

¶16

Learned counsel appearing for the State and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 did not raise any serious objection.

¶17

Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the facts of this case, Cr.M.P. No.895 of 2022 is directed to be restored to its original file at the same stage at which it was before its dismissal.

¶18

Registry is directed to list Cr.M.P. No.895 of 2022 before the concerned Bench after a week.

¶19

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶20

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶21

11/09/2026 Abhiraj/

Prahlad Singh v. State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prahlad Singh v. 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