1 Serial No. 02 Regular List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Crl.M.C. No. 35 of 2025 Date of Decision: 10.11.2025 Smti. Yoolimon Sympli, D/o Andrico Suba, R/o Tluh Village, Sutnga, East Jaintia Hills District, Meghalaya. ……… Applicant -Vs- 1. Shri. Jerominus Sukhlain, S/o (L) Patrick Sympli, R/o Lumthari Village, P.O Saipung, East Jaintia Hills District, Meghalaya. ………. Respondent 2. State of Meghalaya Through the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Meghalaya. Department of Home (Police), Civil Secretariat, Shillong .…….. Proforma Respondent Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge Hon’ble Mr. Justice B. Bhattacharjee, Judge 2025:MLHC:1060-DB 2 Appearance: For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Ms. R. Dutta, Legal Aid Counsel. Mr. S. Thapa, Adv. Mr. S. Chanda, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. P. Yobin, Adv. with Mr. K.V. Kharlyngdoh, Adv. for R 1. Mr. S. Sengupta, Addl. PP for R 2. i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc.: ii) Whether approved for publication in press: Yes/No JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) Per W. Diengdoh, J: 1. Ms. R. Dutta, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the applicant has submitted that through inadvertence, this Misc. Case has been filed, seeking leave of this Court to appeal, however, she prays that this application may be disposed of as not pressed. 2. Mr. P. Yobin, learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No. 1 and Mr. S. Sengupta, learned Addl. PP appears on behalf of the respondent No. 2. 3. On prayer so made by the learned Legal Aid Counsel, this Misc. Case is dismissed and stands disposed of as not pressed. 4. Before the appeal is admitted and diarized, the learned Legal Aid 2025:MLHC:1060-DB 3 Counsel submits that the appeal has been preferred by the sister of the victim, being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 29.01.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Khliehriat in Sessions Case No. 88 of 2022, wherein the accused person therein has been acquitted. 5. At this juncture, Mr. P. Yobin, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 has raised an objection as to the locus of the appellant, inasmuch as, there is no proof of her being the sister of the said victim. 6. On this short point, this Court is inclined to allow the learned Legal Aid Counsel to produce proof as far as the locus of the appellant is concerned. 7. On the prayer of the learned Legal Aid Counsel to amend the cause title as far as the insertion of the proper provision of law is concerned, this too is allowed, provided the appeal is finally admitted. 8. List the appeal after 2(two) weeks. (B. Bhattacharjee) (W. Diengdoh) Judge Judge 2025:MLHC:1060-DB Digitally signed by DARIKORDOR NARY Date: 2025.11.10 19:04:18 IST