Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010092222025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/535/2025 AJOY MURA S/O. SRI AKOLA MURA, R/O. BISONIMUKH MAJGAON, P/S. SAIKHOWGHAT, DIST. TINSUKIA, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP BY THE PP ASSAM 2:SAPNA MURAH W/O. SRI SUREN MURAH R/O. BISONIMUKH DIST. TINSUKIA ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K P PATHAK, FOR LEGAL AID Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Linked Case : ST.Rev./0/0 SRI AJOY MURA ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM Page No.# 2/3 REP BY PP ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR. BHARGAV DAS Advocate for : appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE YARENJUNGLA LONGKUMER ORDER Date : 28.05.2025 [M. Choudhury, J] Heard Mr. B. Das, learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and Ms. A. Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the opposite party-respondent no. 1 for the State of Assam. 2. The instant interlocutory application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is preferred seeking condonation of delay of thirty-seven days in preferring the connected criminal appeal. The connected criminal appeal has been preferred under Section 415[2], Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 against a Judgment and Order dated 22.01.2025 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge – cum- Special Judge [POCSO], Tinsukia [‘the trial court’, for short] in POCSO Case no. 70/2022. By the Judgment and Order dated 22.01.2025, the learned trial court finding the applicant-appellant guilty for the offence under Section 376 [2] [f] of the Indian Penal Code [IPC], has sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-. 3. We have gone through the statements and averments made in the instant interlocutory application. 4. Ms. A. Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has fairly submitted that since the applicant-appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life, the interest of justice would be better sub-served if the connected appeal is heard on merits after Page No.# 3/3 effecting service of notice on the opposite party-respondent no. 2. 5. On having gone through the statements and averments made in this application, we are of the considered view that the applicant-appellant has been able to explain the period of delay of thirty-seven days showing sufficient cause. 6. We are also of the considered view that since the applicant-appellant has been convicted under Section 376 [2] [f],IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life, interest of justice will be better sub-served if the connected appeal is heard on merits expeditiously after condoning the period of delay of thirty-seven days. The issuance of notice to the opposite party-respondent no. 2 is dispensed with at this stage as at the stage of hearing the connected criminal appeal, service of notice upon the opposite party-respondent no. 2 is to be ensured and the opposite party-respondent no. 2 would be heard, if the opposite party-respondent no. 2 enters appearance after service of notice. 7. For the afore-said reasons, the instant application is allowed condoning the delay of thirty-seven days in preferring the connected appeal. 8. The Registry to register the connected appeal and thereafter, list the same in the admission column. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant