JITENDRA PRASAD vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - SHIV SHANKAR KUMAR — Cr.M.P./1192/2026

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

CNR: JHHC010083042026

CASE DISPOSED

Filing Number

Cr.M.P./5444/2026

Filing Date

11-03-2026

Registration No

Cr.M.P./1192/2026

Registration Date

23-04-2026

Judge

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

Coram

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE ( 121 )

Sub-Category

Restoration ( 18 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

08th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Acts & Sections

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

Petitioner(s)

JITENDRA PRASAD

Adv. AKCHANSH KISHORE

Respondent(s)

THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - SHIV SHANKAR KUMAR

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

08-04-2026

LAWAZIMA

08-05-2026

Admission

Orders

08-05-2026
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

Summary: The Jharkhand High Court granted Jitendra Prasad's petition to restore Cr.M.P. No.3475 of 2024 to its original file. The petition had been dismissed for non-compliance with a court order requiring deposit of Rs.1,000 with the Jharkhand State Legal Services Authority, which the petitioner's advocate's clerk failed to do due to bonafide mistake. The court found the non-compliance was neither deliberate nor intentional and that the petitioner had good grounds to pursue the case, therefore restoring it to its original stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Jharkhand High Court granted Jitendra Prasad's petition to restore Cr.M.P. No.3475 of 2024 to its original file. The petition had been dismissed for non-compliance with a court order requiring deposit of Rs.1,000 with the Jharkhand State Legal Services Authority, which the petitioner's advocate's clerk failed to do due to bonafide mistake. The court found the non-compliance was neither deliberate nor intentional and that the petitioner had good grounds to pursue the case, therefore restoring it to its original stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

An Application U/s 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 All acts →

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case