Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Meghalaya · body

2025 DAILYLAW 614 (MEG)

CHANKY SHADAP v. STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND ANOTHER

Crl.M.C./22/2025 · 2025-05-15

B Bhattacharjee

Criminal Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Serial No. 04 Regular List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Crl.M.C. No.22 of 2025 Date of Order: 15.05.2025 Shri. Chanky Shadap Son of (L) Krot Suna, Resident of Mukhla Village, Umsuwe, West Jaintia Hills District, Meghalaya …..Petitioner-Appellant -VERSUS- 1. The State of Meghalaya through the Superintendent of Police, West Jaintia Hills District, Meghalaya. 2. The Office Incharge, Jowai Police Station, West Jaintia Hills District, Meghalaya. …..Opposite Parties-Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice B. Bhattacharjee, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Mr. M.A. Laitmon, Adv For the Respondent(s) : Mr. N.D. Chullai, AAG with Mr. E.R. Chyne, GA ORAL: - Heard Mr. M.A. Laitmon, learned counsel appearing for the applicant and also Mr. N.D. Chullai, learned AAG assited by Mr. E.R. Chyne, learned GA appearing for the opposite parties. 2025:MLHC:385 By this application, the applicant has sought for condonation of delay of 1,151 days in preferring the connected criminal appeal against the Judgement and Order dated 25.11.2021 passed by the Court of the Session Judge, West Jaintia Hills District, Jowai in Session Case No.80 of 2015. The reason for delay is stated to be due to illiteracy and financially poor background of the applicant. It is also stated that the mother of the applicant was a patient of cancer and was continuously suffering till she passed away and there was no one to extend support to the applicant in preferring the appeal against his conviction. Against the prayer of condonation, an objection has been filed by the opposite parties. The learned AAG appearing for the respondents argued that there is proper explanation of reason for the delay. Upon hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the averments made in the application, this Court finds that the ground for delay has been sufficiently explained. Taking into consideration that the applicant has a right to challenge his conviction in appeal, the prayer made in this application stands allowed by condoning the delay of 1,151 days in preferring the connected criminal appeal. Registry to diarize the appeal and list it for admission. This Criminal Misc.Case stands disposed of. Judge Meghalaya 15.05.2025 “Shrity” 2025:MLHC:385 Digitally signed by SHRITY CH MOMIN Date: 2025.05.15 15:09:54 IST