[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Arbind Tewari @ Arbind Tiwary vs The State Of Jharkhand on 20 March, 2026
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
( 2026:JHHC:7972 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No.3764 of 2025
------
1. Arbind Tewari @ Arbind Tiwary, aged about 66 years, son of
Mahant Tiwary;
2. Sai Ankit @ Ankit Tiwary, aged about 35 years, son of Arbind
Tewari @ Arbind Tiwari,
Both are presently resident of Flat No.221, Basant Colony,
Sundergarh, P.O. & P.S.-Rourkela, District-Sundergarh (Odisha).
... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Kriti Kumari, D/o Sri Amrit Kumar Pandey, resident of Village-
Saharpura, Qtr. No. L 251, P.O. & P.S.-Sindri, District-Dhanbad.
... Opposite Parties
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioners : Mr. Mahesh Tewari, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Subodh Kr. Dubey, Addl.P.P.
For the OP 2 : Md. Azam, Advocate
------
Order No:-03 Dated:-20-03-2026
Heard the parties.
This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by the
petitioners with the prayer for restoration of Cr.M.P. No.2400 of 2024 to
its original file which stood dismissed for non-compliance of
peremptory order dated 13.10.2025.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that
Cr.M.P. No.2400 of 2024 stood dismissed for non-compliance of
peremptory order dated 13.10.2025 for depositing the payment of
Rs.1,000/- by the petitioners with the Jharkhand State Legal Services
Authority (JHALSA) peremptorily within two weeks. It is next
submitted that due to situation beyond the control of the petitioners, the
petitioners could not deposit the said amount within the stipulated
time; which resulted in dismissal of the said Cr.M.P. No.2400 of 2024 for
non-compliance of peremptory order dated 13.10.2025. It is next
submitted that non-compliance of peremptory order dated 13.10.2025
was neither deliberate nor intentional. It is also submitted that the
petitioners have very good grounds to agitate in the said Cr.M.P.
No.2400 of 2024 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. No.2400 of 2024 be restored to its original file.
Learned counsel appearing for the State has not raised any
serious objection.
Learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 vehemently opposes
the prayer of the petitioners for restoration of the said Cr.M.P. No.2400
of 2024 and submits that the opposite party No.2 will unnecessarily be
harassed if the same is restored to its original file, hence, the opposite
party No.2 be compensated adequately.
Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for
the petitioners, Cr.M.P. No.2400 of 2024 is directed to be restored to its
original file at the same stage at which it was before its dismissal
subject to payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- by the petitioners to the
opposite party No.2 through his counsel appearing in the record within
two weeks from the date of this order.
Registry is directed to list Cr.M.P. No.2400 of 2024 before the
concerned Bench after two weeks only if the petitioners file the proof of
payment of the cost of Rs.10,000/- to the opposite party No.2 through
his counsel appearing in the record within two weeks from the date of
this order failing which this conditional order shall not be given effect
to and Cr.M.P. No.2400 of 2024 shall stand dismissed.
This criminal miscellaneous petition is disposed of accordingly.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
20/03/2026
Abhiraj/
