Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010172022024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/1078/2024 DIBYAKANTI PAUL @ TUTON S/O. DILIP PAUL, R/O. VILL.- PALIAPOOL, P/S. LAKHIPUR, DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM. 2:SASANKA DAS S/O. LATE SURESH DAS R/O. VILL.- PALIAPOOL P/S. LAKHIPUR DIST. CACHAR ASSAM PIN-788098 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. L R MAZUMDER, MR. A ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Linked Case : DIBYAKANTI PAUL @ TUTON VERSUS Page No.# 2/3 THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR G ------------ Advocate for : MR. L R MAZUMDER Advocate for : appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR G BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER 07.02 .2025 (Soumitra Saikia, J) Heard Mr. L.R. Mazumder, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Senior Counsel and Addl. P.P. assisted by Ms. R. Das, learned counsel for the State. This interlocutory application has been filed by the applicant seeking for condonation in filing application against the judgment and order dated 25.01.2021 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, (FTC), Cachar, Silchar in Sessions Case No. 152 of 2009 convicting and sentencing the applicant/appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 302 of IPC and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, another simple imprisonment for three months and also rigorous imprisonment for three years for committing offence under Section 201 of IPC and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further simple imprisonment for a period of three months. The respondent State has not filed any objection. The learned Addl. P.P. submits that since this is a statutory appeal preferred by applicant/appellant who is presently undergoing sentence, the Court may pass appropriate orders. Page No.# 3/3 Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the application on record, it is seen that the delay has been explained to be on the ground of utter penuary stated to have been suffered by the applicant/appellant undergoing sentence presently. Therefore, in order to get legal advice considerable effort was required to be put into arrange for finance required and accordingly after considerable delay he was not able to approach appropriate lawyer for getting legal help and therefore the delay had occurred. In view of such averments made and also the submissions made by the counsel for the appellant and the same not being opposed by the respondent State, let this delay be condoned. Delay of 962 days is condoned. Let the Registry to register the number and connect the criminal appeal along with interlocutory application, if any. The present interlocutory application is accordingly allowed and disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant