Kiran Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand
2026 Latest Caselaw 810 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Kiran Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand on 6 February, 2026

Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

                                                                           ( 2026:JHHC:3295 )




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                                      Cr. M.P. No. 1918 of 2025

                 Kiran Kumar, son of Sri Kalika Rai, aged about 45 years, proprietor
                 of M/s Vinayaka Industries, Resident of 192, Co-operative colony,
                 P.O. Bokaro Steel City, P.S. B.S. City, Dist. Bokaro 827001
                                                        ...      ...    Petitioner
                                          Versus
                 1. The State of Jharkhand
                 2. Arun Kumar Gupta, son of late Prem Chandra Gupta, Proprietor
                    M/s United Iron Corporation, Resident of Shakti Nagar, Graveyard
                    Road, Joraphatak Road, P.O. Dhanbad, P.S. Dhansar, Dist.
                    Dhanbad                      ...              ... Opp. Parties
                                          ---

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

For the Petitioner : Mr. Deepak Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opp. Parties : Ms. Kumari Rashni, Advocate

---

14/06.02.2026 This petition has been filed for restoration of Cr. Revision No. 78 of 2024 which was dismissed on account of non- removal of defects in terms of order dated 03.07.2024. Thereafter the petitioner had filed a petition for restoration of the revision application being Cr. M.P. No. 3381 of 2024 whereby time was extended for removal of defects vide order dated 20.12.2024. In spite of that the defects were not removed and now the petitioner has filed the instant petition for restoration of the Cr. Revision 78 of 2024.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to explain as to how the second application for restoration is maintainable once time for removal has been extended vide order passed in Cr. M.P. No. 3381 of 2024.

3. At this, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this petition to take appropriate steps in connection with order dated 20.12.2024 passed in Cr. M.P. No. 3381 of 2024.

4. With the aforesaid liberty, Cr. M.P. No. 1918 of 2025 is dismissed as withdrawn.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated:06.02.2026 Uploaded on: 09.02.2026 Binit