Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010260252025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/1316/2025 BALUBHADRA BORDOLOI S/O SRI THANU BORDOLOI, R/O VILL BORONGABARI, P.S- MIKIRBHETA, DIST- MORIGAON, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM 2:SMTI. SONMONI BORA W/O SRI TIKEN BORA R/O VILL- PALAHGURI P.S- MIKIRBHETA DIST- MORIGAON ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B HALDAR (LEGAL AID COUNSEL), Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Linked Case : EC/0/0 BALUBHADRA BORDOLOI S/O THANU BORDOLOI R/O VILL- BORONGABARI P.S- MIKIRBHETA DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM Page No.# 2/4 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ASSAM 2:SONMONI BORA W/O SRI TIKEN BORA R/O VILL- PALASHGURI P.S- MIKIRBHETA DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR. B HALDAR Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR Linked Case : ST.Rev./0/0 BALUBHADRA BORDOLOI S/O THANU BORDOLOI R/O VILL- BORONGABARI P.S- MIKIRBHETA DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ASSAM 2:SONMONI BORA W/O SRI TIKEN BORA R/O VILL- PALAHGURI P.S- MIKIRBHETA DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR. B HALDAR Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR Page No.# 3/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER 10.12.2025 1. Learned counsel Mr. B. Haldar is present for the applicant Balubhadra Bordoloi who has filed this application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 26 days in filing the preferred appeal against the judgment and order dated 21.08.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (POCSO), Morigaon in POCSO Case No. 13/2019, convicting the appellant under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 days and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/- with default stipulation. 2. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr. B. Sarma is present for the respondent State. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the delay was due to the delay in communication relating to the impugned judgment and order. This case has come from the DLSA, Morigaon and the delay was owing to the formalities to be observed for obtaining copies and relevant documents. 4. The petitioner is not responsible for the laches and no malafide is discernable on his part. 5. Considering all aspects, delay is hereby condoned. 6. In terms of the above observation, this application is disposed of. 7. Registry to register the connected appeal. Page No.# 4/4 JUDGE Comparing Assistant