Biren Bora v. The State of Assam and Anr

ORDER Date : 21.08.2024 [Manish Choudhury, J]

Heard Ms. D. Borpujari, learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and Ms. S.H. Bora, learned Page No.# 2/3 Additional Public Prosecutor for the opposite party no. 1, State of Assam.

¶2The instant application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is preferred seeking condonation of delay of 17 days, which is stated to have occurred in preferring the accompanying criminal appeal against a Judgment and Order dated 16.05.2024 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge [POCSO], Morigaon ['the Special Court', for short] in POCSO Case no. 332/2023. By the Judgment and Order dated 16.05.2024, the applicant-appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 6, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences [POCSO] Act, 2012 and he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 20 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, with default stipulation.

¶3The applicant-appellant has explained the reasons for the delay of 17 days in paragraphs 8, 9 and 10 of the instant application.

¶4Ms. Bora, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has submitted that since the applicant-appellant has been convicted for serious offences and also inter-alia sentenced for a period of 20 years, under Section 6, POCSO Act, interest of justice would be better sub-served if the accompanying appeal is heard on merits.

¶5We have gone through the statements and averments made in the instant interlocutory application, more particularly, in paragraphs 8, 9 and 10, thereof.

¶6Having gone through the same, we are of the view that the applicant-appellant has been able to explain the reason for delay with sufficient cause. Moreover, as the applicant-appellant because of his conviction under Section 6, POCSO Act has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 20 years term, the cause of justice, in our considered view, would be better sub served if the accompanying appeal is heard on merits.

¶7Notice to the opposite party no. 2 has not been issued at this stage to the opposite party no. 2 will have participatory right to contest the accompanying criminal appeal and we are of the considered view that notice to the opposite party no. 2 can be dispensed with at this stage.

¶8Accordingly, the instant interlocutory application seeking condonation of delay of 17 days stands allowed. Page No.# 3/3

¶9The Registry to register the appeal and thereafter, list the application for admission.

JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010167782024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/768/2024 BIREN BORA S/O. SRI. HAGUBOR BORA, R/O. NIZ-CHARABAHI, P.S. MIKIRBHETA, DIST.- MORIGAON, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM. 2:SMTI. RITA DEKA W/O. SRI. NUTUL DEKA R/O. NIZ-CHARAIBHAHI P/S. MIKIRBHETA DIST. MORIGAON ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MRS DIPANJALI BORPUJARI, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA