Patna High Court
Naga SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The Court held that the appeal may be restored to its original file despite the default.
Summary
Petitioner Naga Singh filed an application seeking restoration of Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 3263 of 2025 after it was rejected for failure to file required documents within a two‑week deadline. The petition argued that the delay was due to circumstances beyond his control and not deliberate. The State of Bihar, represented by an Assistant Public Prosecutor, raised no objection to the restoration request. The Court considered the petitioner's explanation and the lack of opposition, and exercised its discretion to restore the appeal to the original file. Consequently, the restoration application was allowed, and the appeal reinstated.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal appeal dismissed for non‑compliance with a notice can be restored on the ground of unavoidable delay.
Subjects
- restoration of appeal
- default judgment
- criminal procedure
- high court discretion
- non‑compliance with notice
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9691 of 2026
In
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3263 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-101 Year-2025 Thana- SASARAM MUFFSIL District- Rohtas
======================================================
Naga Singh S/o- Late Janeshwar Singh R/v- Chhotka More Ps- Sasaram M,
Dist- Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Kamlesh Ram S/o- Late Shivmuni Ram R/v- Chhotka More, Ps- Sasaram
Dist- Rohtas
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramanuj Tiwary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umanath Mishra, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The present application has been filed for
restoration of Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 3263 of 2025 to its original
file.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide
order dated 23.09.2025 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 3263 of
2025 notices were issued to Respondent No.2 directing the
petitioner herein to file requisites within a period of two weeks.
Learned counsel further submits that petitioner failed to file the
requisites within the stipulated period of time and, due to non-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9691 of 2026(2) dt.06-02-2026
2/2
compliance of the said order, the said application stood rejected
on 07.10.2025. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner
has not deliberately delayed in filing the requisites for notice,
but the delay has been caused due to the circumstances that
were beyond the control of the petitioner. Learned counsel,
therefore, prays that the present restoration application may be
allowed.
4. Learned APP for the State raised no objection to the
prayer made on behalf of the petitioner.
5. Considering the statements made in the application
and the submissions made in support thereof, the present
restoration application is allowed and Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 3263
of 2025 is restored to its original file.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-
U T
Checking your session…