Patna High Court
Durga PrasadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The Court restored Criminal Revision No.656/2018, allowing the petition for restoration.
Summary
The petitioners, a group of individuals including Durga Prasad, filed an application seeking restoration of Criminal Revision No.656/2018, which had been dismissed for non‑prosecution on 1 July 2024. The respondents, the State of Bihar, opposed the restoration. The Court examined Section 403 of the BNSS, which generally prohibits alteration of a final judgment except for clerical errors, and considered whether this restriction barred restoration of a dismissed matter. Relying on the Apex Court’s decision in Vishnu Agarwal v. State of U.P. (Criminal Appeal No. (S) 1323 of 2004), the Court held that restoration is permissible when sufficient cause is shown to serve the ends of justice. Consequently, the Court restored the revision petition to its original file and allowed the restoration application.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal revision dismissed for non‑prosecution can be restored despite the restriction imposed by Section 403 of the BNSS.
- Whether the showing of sufficient cause suffices to justify restoration of the dismissed matter.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 403
Subjects
- restoration
- criminal revision
- non‑prosecution
- Section 403
- appeal
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30682 of 2025
In
CRIMINAL REVISION No.656 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-202 Year-2006 Thana- MASAUDHI District- Patna
======================================================
Durga Prasad S/O Late Nathuni Prasad Residents of Village - Gopalpur Math,
PS - Masaurhi, District - Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Bheem Yadav son of Kamla Prasad Residents of Village - Gopalpur Math,
PO- Nadaul, PS - Masaurhi, District- Patna- 804 454
3. Satyender Yadav son of Mohit Yadav Residents of Village - Gopalpur Math,
PO- Nadaul, PS - Masaurhi, District- Patna- 804 454
4. Naresh Yadav son of late Yadu Yadav Residents of Village - Gopalpur Math,
PO- Nadaul, PS - Masaurhi, District- Patna- 804 454
5. Nagendra Yadav son of Mohit Yadav Residents of Village - Gopalpur Math,
PO- Nadaul, PS - Masaurhi, District- Patna- 804 454
6. Devendra Yadav son of Mohit Yadav Residents of Village - Gopalpur Math,
PO- Nadaul, PS - Masaurhi, District- Patna- 804 454
7. Chandrama Yadav son of Mohit Yadav Residents of Village - Gopalpur
Math, PO- Nadaul, PS - Masaurhi, District- Patna- 804454
8. Mithilesh Yadav son of Naresh Yadav Residents of Village - Gopalpur Math,
PO- Nadaul, PS - Masaurhi, District- Patna- 804454
9. Surendra Yadav son of Kamla Yadav Residents of Village - Gopalpur Math,
PO- Nadaul, PS - Masaurhi, District- Patna- 804454
10. Mahendra Yadav son of Kamla Yadav Residents of Village - Gopalpur Math,
PO- Nadaul, PS - Masaurhi, District- Patna- 804454
11. Manoj Yadav S/O Chandrama Yadav Residents of Village - Gopalpur Math,
PO- Nadaul, PS - Masaurhi, District- Patna- 804454
12. Mohit Yadav son of Rohan Yadav Residents of Village - Gopalpur Math,
PO- Nadaul, PS - Masaurhi, District- Patna- 804454
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Arvind Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Binod Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 02-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners and learned APP for the State.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30682 of 2025(4) dt.02-04-2026
2/2
2. The petitioners seek restoration of Cr. Rev.
No.656/2018 which stood dismissed for non-prosecution vide
order dated 01.07.2024.
3. In the opinion of this Court, Section 403 of the
BNSS provides as follows:
“403. Court not to alter judgment.
Save as otherwise provided by this Sanhita or by any
other law for the time being in force, no Court, when it
has signed its judgment or final order disposing of a
case, shall alter or review the same except to correct a
clerical or arithmetical error.”
4. The aforesaid provision, though placing a
restriction on alteration or review of a final judgment, does not
preclude restoration of a matter dismissed for non-prosecution,
upon sufficient cause being shown, in order to secure the ends
of justice as held by the Apex Court in the case of Vishnu
Agarwal vs State Of U.P. & Anr passed in Criminal Appeal
No(S). 1323 Of 2004.
5. In view of the above information and pleadings
made in the restoration application and the affidavit the Cr. Rev.
No.656/2018 is restored to its original file.
6. The restoration application stands allowed.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-
U T
Checking your session…