Patna High CourtCR. MISC./21377/2016dismissed

Puttul Rajak @ Bishwanath Rajak v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2016-05-25Mr. Justice Ashwani Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.21377 of 2016 ======================================================

1. Puttul Rajak @ Bishwanath Rajak son of ............. Resident of village and Post Office- Kateyana, Police Station- Bihia, District- Bhojpur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rishikesh Ojha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. M.Rab(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 25-05-2016 The present application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed seeking restoration of Criminal Misc. No. 19613 of 2014 which was dismissed for default on 08.09.2014 due to non compliance of the order dated 01.09.2014 passed by a Bench of this Court. By the aforesaid Criminal Misc. No. 19613 of 2014 the petitioner had sought for grant of pre-arrest bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 643-C of 2012. By order dated 01.09.2014 the petitioner was directed to comply with the previous order dated 05.08.2014 by which the petitioner was directed to take steps for fresh service of notice upon opposite party no. 2 (complainant). It is more than 18 months after the dismissal of the application due to non-compliance of the order of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21377 of 2016 (2) dt.25-05-2016 the Court dated 01.09.2014, the instant application for restoration has been filed under section 482 Cr.P.C.

In my view, there is absolutely no justification for the inordinate delay caused in filing of the present restoration application.

In that view of the matter, I do not find any reason to direct for restoration of Criminal Misc. No. 19613 of 2014 which has already been dismissed for default. Accordingly, this application for restoration is dismissed. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to file another application under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, if he is so advised.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Amin/- U