Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010094852025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/578/2025 PERISH KUTUM @ GAVASKAR S/O-LATE BIRBAL KUTUM, R/O-VILL.BHOMA AMLOKHI GAON,KANGKAN CHAPORI, P.S-DHAKUAKHANA, DIST-LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : , MS A.SARMA,MRS A BUJARBARUAH Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 06.06.2025 [M. Choudhury, J] Heard Mr. S. Nawaz, learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and Mr. R.R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the opposite party-respondent no. 1, State of Assam. 2. The instant application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is preferred seeking Page No.# 2/3 condonation of delay of 25 days in preferring the accompanying criminal appeal. The applicant as the appellant has preferred the accompanying criminal appeal under Section 415[2], Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 against a Judgment and Order dated 05.02.2025 passed by the Court of learned Special Judge, Lakhimpur at North Lakhimpur [‘the Special Court’, for short] in Special [NDPS] Case no. 18/2021. By the Judgment and Order dated 05.02.2025, the learned Special Court has convicted the applicant-appellant for the offence under Section 20 [b] [ii] [C] of the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances [NDPS] Act, 1985 and the applicant-appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 12 [twelve] years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/-, with default stipulations. 3. We have gone through the statements and averments made in the instant interlocutory application, more particularly, in Paragraph 5 to 13 thereof. 4. Ms. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has fairly submitted that since the period of delay is only 25 days, the delay can be condoned in order to hear the accompanying criminal appeal on merits. 5. Having regard to the statements and averments made in the instant application, we are of the considered view that the applicant-appellant has been able to explain the period of delay of 25 days showing sufficient case. Moreover, since the applicant-appellant has been sentenced to undergo 12 [twelve] years, the interest of justice would be better sub-served if the accompanying criminal appeal is heard on merits. Accordingly, the instant application seeking condonation of delay of 25 days in preferring the accompanying criminal appeal is condoned. 6. The Registry to register the accompanying criminal appeal and thereafter, to list the same in the admission column. JUDGE JUDGE Page No.# 3/3 Comparing Assistant