Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 2339 (GAU)

MANJURUL ISLAM BARBHUIYA v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS.

I.A.(Crl.)/940/2025 · 2026-01-26

Parthivjyoti Saikia

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010188672025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/940/2025 MANJURUL ISLAM BARBHUIYA SON OF LATE HARIS ALI BARBHUIYA RESIDENT OF WATER WORKS ROAD, P.O. AND P.S. SILCHAR, DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS. REP BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:APPU MAZUMDER S/O ALA MIA R/O VILL- MADHURBOND AMMERIA LANE P.S. SILCHAR PIN-788001 DIST. CACHAR ASSAM 3:BAPPU MAZUMDER S/O ALA MIA R/O VILL- MADHURBOND AMMERIA LANE P.S. SILCHAR PIN-788001 DIST. CACHAR ASSAM 4:PAPPU MAZUMDER S/O ALA MIA R/O VILL- MADHURBOND AMMERIA LANE Page No.# 2/3 P.S. SILCHAR PIN-788001 DIST. CACHAR ASSAM 5:HASSAN LASKAR S/OLATE FAKAR UDDIN LASKAR R/O WATER WORKS ROAD P.O. AND P.S. SILCHAR PIN-788001 DIST. CACHAR ASSAM 6:SAJHIB AHMED HIS FATHER NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER R/O WATER WORKS ROAD P.O. AND P.S. SILCHAR PIN-788001 DIST. CACHAR ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A BHATTACHARYA, MR S PAUL,MR. A BHATTACHARJEE,MR S CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. DARAK ULLAH, AMICUS CURIAE (R-2),MR. M.A. BARBHUIYA (R-3 to-R-6),MR. H ISLAM (R-3 to R-6),MR. B SINHA (R-3 to R-6) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER 27.01.2026 Heard Mr. A. Bhattacharya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam. Also heard Mr. Darak Ullah, learned Amicus Curiae representing the respondent no. 2 as well as Mr. B. Sinha, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 3 to 6. This is an application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act praying for condonation of delay of 49 days in preferring the connected revision petition. Mr. Ullah has submitted that he has no objection if the delay is condoned. On the other hand, Mr. Sinha has dealt upon the merit of the revision petition itself. Page No.# 3/3 I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides. This court is of the opinion that the delay has been satisfactorily explained. Accordingly, the delay stands condoned. The connected criminal revision petition shall be registered and listed accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant