BHIRGHUN SAO ALIAS BHIRGUN SAO vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - FAHAD ALLAM — Cr.M.P./1181/2026

Case under An Application U/s 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 08th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: JHHC010029662026

Filing Number

Cr.M.P./2017/2026

Filing Date

27-Jan-2026

Registration No

Cr.M.P./1181/2026

Registration Date

22-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE ( 121 )

Sub-Category

Restoration ( 18 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

08-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 04-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

An Application U/s 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BHIRGHUN SAO ALIAS BHIRGUN SAO

    Adv. SHEO KUMAR SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - FAHAD ALLAM

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 08-May-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar DwivediView PDF

    The High Court of Jharkhand granted petitioner Bhirghun Sao's request to restore Criminal Revision No. 22074 of 2025, which had been dismissed for non-compliance with a December 18, 2025 order. The court accepted the petitioner's submission that defects were inadvertently not removed and, with no objection from the State, restored the revision petition to its original file for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 08-May-2026

    Admission

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

  4. 19-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 27-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. Cr.M.P./1181/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Jharkhand granted petitioner Bhirghun Sao's request to restore Criminal Revision No. 22074 of 2025, which had been dismissed for non-compliance with a December 18, 2025 order. The court accepted the petitioner's submission that defects were inadvertently not removed and, with no objection from the State, restored the revision petition to its original file for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case