Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010052852025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/241/2025 DIBAKAR BARUAH @ BORUAH S/O. JAYANTA BORUAH, R/O. HATIMURIA (GHARPHALIA) GAON, MORA PUKHURI, P/S. AMGURI, DIST. SIVASAGAR, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:MINAKSHI PHUKAN W/O. SHRI BISWAJIT PHUKAN R/O. MORAPUKHURI KONWAR GAON P/S. AMGURI DIST. SIVASAGAR ASSAM-785680 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. DITUL DAS, MR. C BORUAH,MR. R BORO,MR A BORUAH Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Linked Case : ST.Rev./0/0 DIBAKAR BARUAH ALIAS BORUAH S/O JAYANTA BORUAH R/O HATIMURIA GHARPHALIA GAON MORA PUKHURI PS AMGURI DIST SIVASAGAR ASSAM VERSUS Page No.# 2/3 THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP BY THE PP ASSAM 2:MINAKSHI PHUKAN W/O SHRI BISWAJIT PHUKAN R/O MORAPUKHURI KONWAR GAON PS AMGURI DIST SIVASAGAR ASSAM 785680 ------------ Advocate for : DITUL DAS Advocate for : appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR Linked Case : EC/0/0 DIBAKAR BARUAH ALIAS BORUAH SIVASAGAR VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP BY THE PP ASSAM 2:MINAKSHI PHUKAN SIVASAGAR ------------ Advocate for : DITUL DAS Advocate for : appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE YARENJUNGLA LONGKUMER ORDER Date : 28.04.2025 Mr. C Boruah, learned Counsel for the petitioner is present. Mr. D Das, learned counsel appearing for respondent is present. Ms. S.H Borah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor is present for the State respondents. Office note dated 04.04.2025 indicates that dasti service has been affected and the appellant has also filed affidavit bringing on record the proof that the informant/respondent No. 2 has been served with a notice by way of dasti service. Page No.# 3/3 Notice is deemed complete. However, when the matter is called today, none appears for the respondent No. 2. This is an application under Section 5 of The Limitation Act, 1963 praying for condonation of delay of 14(fourteen) days in filing the connected appeal. The petitioner/applicant has submitted that due to financial hardships on the part of his parents and also due to non-preferring of the appeal by the jail authorities, the applicant should not be deprived of his statutory right to file an appeal. He has also submitted that the delay caused is not intentional and has been prevented by sufficient causes. The State respondents have no objection in the condonation application. This Court is also satisfied that the petitioner has been able to show sufficient cause for the delay of 14(fourteen) days. Accordingly, this application is allowed and the delay of 14(fourteen) days in filing the connected appeal is condoned. Application is disposed of. The Registry is directed to register the main Criminal Appeal and list it next week. JUDGE Comparing Assistant