Ranjit Kumar Ghosal vs The State Of Jharkhand
2026 Latest Caselaw 818 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Ranjit Kumar Ghosal vs The State Of Jharkhand on 6 February, 2026

Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary

Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary

                                                         [2026:JHHC:3250]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                      Cr.M.P. No.3611 of 2025
                               ------

Ranjit Kumar Ghosal, aged about 50 years, son of Late Ajit Kumar Ghosal, resident of Village Kharkhari Basti, P.O. Kharkhare, P.S. Madhuban, Dist. Dhanbad ... Petitioner Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Rajesh Kumar Sultania, son of Shri Binod Kumar Sultania, resident of Maheshmara, Baijnathpur, P.O. Malhara, P.S. Rikhia, Dist. Deoghar ... Opposite Parties

------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

------

      For the Petitioner         : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
      For the State              : Mr. Prabir Kr. Chatterjee, Spl.P.P.
      For the OP No.2            : None
                                        ------
      Order No:-03 Dated:-06-02-2026
            Heard the parties.

Though notice has been validly served upon the opposite party No.2 yet no one turns up on behalf of the opposite party No.2 in spite of repeated calls.

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer for restoration of Cr.M.P. No.3554 of 2023 to its original file which stood dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 24.11.2025.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Cr.M.P. No.3554 of 2023 stood dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 24.11.2025. It is next submitted that when Cr.M.P. No.3554 of 2023 was listed on 24.11.2025 before this Court and called out for hearing, due to unavoidable circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner could not turn up due to personal work; which resulted in dismissal of the said Cr.M.P. No.3554 of 2023 for non-prosecution vide order dated 24.11.2025. It is further submitted that non-appearance of the learned counsel for the petitioner before this Court 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.3554 of 2023 and unless the same is restored to its original file, the petitioner will be highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that the Cr.M.P. No.3554 of 2023 be restored to its original file.

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

Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, Cr.M.P. No.3554 of 2023 is directed to be restored to its original file at the same stage at which it was before its dismissal.

Registry is directed to list Cr.M.P. No.3554 of 2023 before the appropriate Bench after a week.

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is disposed of accordingly.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:- 06.02.2026 Saroj/