Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010225032025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/1137/2025 ANOWAR HUSSAIN BARBHUIYAN S/O- MUJIBUR RAHMAN BARBHUIYA, R/O- SILDUBI, DHONEHARI PART II, PS SONARI, CACHAR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:HAZIRA BEGUM BARBHUIYAN W/O. MOJIB UDDIN BARBHUIYAN R/O. SILDUBI DHONEHARI PART-II P/S. SONARI DIST. CACHAR ASSAM PIN-78811 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS N HASSAN, FOR LEGAL AID Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 24-10-2025 [M. Choudhury, J] Heard Ms. N. Hassan, learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and Ms. Page No.# 2/3 B. Bhuyan, learned Senior Counsel and Additional Public Prosecutor for the opposite party no. 1. 2. The instant application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is preferred seeking condonation of delay of 110 days, which delay is stated to have occurred in preferring the accompanying criminal appeal under Section 415 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The accompanying criminal appeal has been preferred to assail a Judgment dated 03.04.2025 and an Order on Sentence dated 09.04.2025 passed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Cachar at Silchar [‘the Trial Court’, for short] in Sessions Case no. 41/2024. By the Judgment and Order on Sentence, the applicant-appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 302, Indian Penal Code [IPC] and he has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, with default stipulation. 3. The applicant-appellant has explained in paragraph 4 of the instant application the reasons for delay of 110 days. 4. Ms. Bhuyan, learned Senior Counsel and Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that since the applicant-appellant has been convicted for the offence of murder and has been sentenced for life imprisonment, interest of justice would be better sub-served if the accompanying criminal appeal is heard on merit. 5. We have gone through the statements and averments made in the instant application, more particularly, paragraph 4 thereof. Page No.# 3/3 6. 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 110 days showing sufficient cause, moreover, as the applicant-appellant has been convicted for the offence of murder and has been sentenced to life imprisonment, interest of justice would be better sub-served if the accompanying criminal appeal is heard on merit after condoning the period of delay. 7. For the afore-said reasons, the instant application is allowed condoning the delay of 110 days in preferring the accompanying criminal appeal. 8. The Registry to register the accompanying criminal appeal and thereafter, to list the same in the admission column. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant