- Court
- High Court of Gauhati
- Decided
- 19 April 2024
- Bench
- Robin Phukan
- Case no.
- I.A.(Crl.) 1004/2023
Judgment
ORDER
20.04.2024 Heard1Ms.1D.1Borpujari,1learned1legal1aid1counsel1for1the1applicant1and1Mr.1B. Sarma, 1 learned 1 Additional 1 Public 1 Prosecutor, 1 Assam, 1 appearing 1 for 1 the 1 State Page No.# 2/3 respondent No.1. This interlocutory application is preferred by the applicant, namely, Sunil Thapa for condonation of delay of 87 days in filing connected criminal appeal, against the judgment and order dated 08.05.2023, passed by the learned Special Judge, Jorhat, in Special Case No.51/2019. It is to be noted here that vide said judgment and order, the learned Court below has convicted the applicant under Section 376 IPC, read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and also to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- with default stipulation. Ms. Borpujari, learned legal aid counsel for the applicant submits that the ground for delay in filing connected criminal appeal has been mentioned in paragraphs 9 and 10 of this interlocutory application and further, submits that she has received the letter of assignment dated 19.09.2023, from the Gauhati High Court Legal Services Committee on 20.09.2023 and thereafter, she has collected the relevant documents and prepared the appeal and filed the same on 09.10.2023 and in the entire process the delay of 87 days occurred and the same is not intentional rather it is circumstantial and therefore, it is contended to allow the petition. Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, on the other hand, submits that he has no objection in the event of condoning the delay of 87 days. Having heard the submission of learned Advocates of both the parties, I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and also perused the statement and averment made in paragraphs 9 and 10 of this interlocutory application. And it appears that the delay of 87 days is sufficiently explained and the same appears to be not intentional rather circumstantial and accordingly, this Court is inclined to allow this petition. The delay of 87 days in filing connected criminal appeal stands condoned. In terms of above, this I.A. stands disposed of. Page No.# 3/3 Registry to register and number the connected criminal appeal and list the same before the Court. Comparing Assistant Sd/- Robin Phukan JUDGE
Case details
Parties and counsel
PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010232562023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oI.A.(Crl.)/1004/2023o SUNILoTHAPAo S/OoLALoBAHADURoTHAPA,o VILL.-oCHUNGAJAN,oNO.o4oDAGAON,oP.S.-oVHUNGAJAN,oDIST.-o GOLAGHAT,oASSAM. VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDoANR.o REP.oBYoP.P.,oASSAM. 2:ARUNoDAS oS/OoBIRENoDAS R/OoBORHOLLAoBIJAYoNAGAR oP.O.-oURANGIAL oP.S.-oBORHOLLA oDIST.-oJORHATo AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oMRSoDIPANJALIoBORPUJARIo(LEGALoAIDoCOUNSEL)o AdvocateoforotheoRespondento:oPP,oASSAMoo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo BEFORE HON'BLE0MR.0JUSTICE0ROBIN0PHUKAN
Source: High Court of Gauhati, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.