Jharkhand High Court
Cr.M.P./2901/2026 of FAIZ TAIYAB Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH THE DIRECTOR OF PROSECUTION on 9 October 2026
2026:JHHC:30311
) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 2901 of 2026 ------ Faiz Taiyab, son of Md. Taiyab, aged about 57 years, r/o Flat No. 1A, Block No. B, Central Street, Hindpiri, P.O. & P.S.- Hindpiri, Dist.-Ranchi-834001 … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand
( 2026:JHHC:30311 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No. 2901 of 2026
------
Faiz Taiyab, son of Md. Taiyab, aged about 57 years, r/o Flat No. 1A, Block No. B, Central Street, Hindpiri, P.O. & P.S.- Hindpiri, Dist.-Ranchi-834001
… Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand through the Director of Prosecution, officiating from his office at 88H9+2QJ, Shivpuri Colony, P.O. & P.S.-Hinoo, Dist.-Ranchi, Jharkhand 834002
2. Union of India, represented by the Labour Enforcement Officer (Central), Hazaribagh, Qtr No.F-5”A” & F-“C”, DVC Colony, Near DVC Chowk, P.O. & P.S.-DVC Chowk, Dist.-Hazaribagh-825301 … Opposite Parties
------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Page 1 of 2
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Parth Jalan, Advocate
: Ms. Shivani Jaluka, Advocate For the State
: Mr. Achyut Keshav, Sr. AAG For O.P. No.2
: Mr. Ravi Prakash, CGC ------
Order No.03 Dated- 09.10.2026
Heard the parties.
This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed at the instance of the petitioner for restoration of Cr.M.P. No. 869 of 2025 to its original file.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Cr.M.P. No. 869 of 2025 was dismissed for non-compliance of the peremptory order of depositing Rs.1,000/- with JHALSA. It is next submitted that due to inadvertence, the said amount of Rs.1,000/- could not be deposited with JHALSA and the same resulted in dismissal of Cr.M.P. No. 869 of 2025. It is further submitted that non-compliance of peremptory order was neither deliberate nor intentional and the said money has already been deposited. It is next submitted that the petitioner has very good grounds to agitate in the said Cr.M.P. No. 869 of 2025 and unless Cr.M.P. No. 869 of 2025 is restored to its original file, the petitioner will be highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that Cr.M.P. No. 869 of 2025 be restored to its original file.
Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the facts of this case, Cr.M.P. No. 869 of 2025 is restored to its original file to the stage at which, it was before its dismissal.
List Cr.M.P. No. 869 of 2025 under the appropriate heading before the appropriate bench after a week.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
09.10.2026 Gunjan-
Page 2 of 2
Loading citations and judicial treatment…