Patna High Court
Raju Yadav @ Raju Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The criminal appeal (SJ) No.5358/2024 is restored to its original file.
Summary
The petitioners, Raju Yadav and Rajesh Yadav, filed a restoration application for Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.5358/2024, which had been dismissed for non‑compliance. The High Court examined Section 403 of the Bihar Negotiable Sanhita, which generally prohibits alteration of a final judgment except for clerical errors. The Court held that this restriction does not bar the restoration of a dismissed appeal when sufficient cause is shown, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Vishnu Agarwal v. State of U.P. The application, supported by an affidavit, demonstrated such cause. Consequently, the Court restored the appeal to its original file and allowed the restoration application.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal appeal dismissed for non‑compliance can be restored under Section 403 of the Bihar Negotiable Sanhita.
- Whether the Supreme Court precedent in Vishnu Agarwal v. State of U.P. permits restoration despite the statutory restriction.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Sanhita — s. 403
Subjects
- criminal appeal
- restoration
- non‑compliance
- Section 403
- judicial review
- ends of justice
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.557 of 2026
In
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5358 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-47 Year-2018 Thana- SC/ST District- Madhubani
======================================================
1. Raju Yadav @ Raju Kumar Yadav Son of Bechai Yadav R/O Village- Bheja,
P.S.- Bheja, District- Madhubani
2. Rajesh Yadav Son of Bachai Yadav R/O Village- Bheja, P.S.- Bheja, District-
Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Patna
2. Sitaram Ram Son of Late Shivan Ram R/O Village- Bheja, P.S.- Bheja,
District- Madhubani
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Jitendra Kumar Bharti, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anand Kishore Choudhary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 15-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek restoration of Cr. Appeal (SJ)
No.5358/2024 which stood dismissed for non-compliance vide
order dated 18.04.2025.
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.”
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.557 of 2026(3) dt.15-04-2026
2/2
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-complaince,
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.
Appeal (SJ) No.5358/2024 is restored to its original file.
6. The restoration application stands allowed.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-
U T
Checking your session…