Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010118152025 2025:GAU-AS:8608 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/575/2025 AMELA KHATUN W/O GOLAP HUSSAIN R/O VILL- HABI RADHAKUCHI P.O. BARPETA P.S. BARPETA DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM PIN-781301 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P P MEDHI, MR G BARGAYARY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Linked Case : OTC/0/0 AMELA KHATUN ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM Page No.# 2/4 REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR GHANSHYAM BARGAYARY Advocate for : appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI ORDER 25.06.2025 Heard Mr. G. Bargayary, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. By way of this application, the applicant is seeking condonation of the delay of 22 days in filing the Criminal Revision Petition challenging the impugned Order dated 30.01.2025 passed in P.R.C No. 50/2020 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barpeta. 3. The brief facts of the case is that Non Bailable Warrant of Arrest has been issued against the applicant in P.R.C No. 50/2020 on 30.01.2025 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barpeta. 4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the applicant has filed the accompanying Criminal Revision Petition, however, while filing the same there has been a delay of 22 days. Accordingly, the applicant prays for condonation of the instant application. 5. Mr.G. Bargayary, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant Page No.# 3/4 being a lady from the financially weaker section and due to her financial condition, she could not approach a lawyer within the stipulated time period and therefore, the delay of 22 days had occurred. 6. Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor submits that he has received no instruction to oppose to the condonation prayer made in the instant condonation application. 7. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties and have also perused the materials available on record. 8. The grounds of condonation of delay in the condonation application reads as under: “2. That the applicant begs to state that she is aggrieved by the Impugned Order dated 30.1.2025 passed in P.R C no.50 of 2020 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barpeta wherein a Non Bailabale Warrant of Arrest has been issued against her. 3. That it is most humbly stated that the applicant lady is a poor woman and is no way connected with the allead allegations. Her financial condition is very precarious and as it was difficult for her to manage and approach a lawyer to avail legal assistance. Hence, there has been a delay of 22 days in filing this Criminal Revision Petition. 4. That in the aforesaid facts and circumstances it is most humbly prayed that taking into consideration of the present situation of the applicant, the delay of 22 days was not intentional and was due to some unavoidable situation. Therefore, with folded hands it is prayed the delay of 22 days be condoned and the applicant be allowed to file the accompanying Criminal Revision Petition in Page No.# 4/4 the Interest of Justice for proper adjudication of the matter.” 9. Reading of the aforesaid paragraphs, it appears that the grounds urged for condoning the delay are sufficient and bonafide. 10. Accordingly, the delay of 22 days in filing the accompanying Criminal Revision Petition stands condoned. 11. Let Registry register the accompanying Criminal Revision Petition. 12. Disposed off. JUDGE Comparing Assistant