Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010057582025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/988/2025 MANAUWAR ALI S/O LT GULAM RASOOL, R/O VILL NIBI LAHAGARA, PS. BARA BARA JASRA, DIST ALLAHABAD, PRAYAGRAJ, UTTAR PRADESH. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:NIRANJAN DAS S/O LT NILKANTA DAS SI CHURAIBARI BAZARICHERRA PS DIST. KARIMGANJ ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B HALDAR, FOR LEGAL AID Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 15.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. B. Haldar, learned legal-aid-counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. K. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State of Assam. 2. This interlocutory application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has Page No.# 2/3 been filed by the petitioner praying for condoning the delay of 100 days in preferring the connected criminal appeal. By preferring the said appeal, the petitioner has impugned the judgment and order dated 03.10.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, Karimganj in Special (NDPS) Case No. 90/2022 whereby the petitioner was convicted under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act, 1985 and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for one year. 3. The learned legal-aid-counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the delay was caused as the petitioner has been afforded the legal-aid in the form of appointing a legal-aid-counsel for filing of the said appeal and the reasons for delay has been stated in paragraph Nos. 5 and 6 of the delay condonation application. 4. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that considering the fact that in this case the legal-aid-counsel has been appointed, the State does not intend to oppose the prayer for condonation of delay. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the records. 6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides as well as considering the grounds for delay shown by the petitioner in paragraph Nos. 5 and 6 of the application for condonation of delay, this Court is of the considered opinion that the cause for approaching this Court by filing the connected criminal appeal belatedly with a delay of 100 days has been sufficiently explained in the application for condonation of delay. The said delay of 100 days is, therefore, condoned and this interlocutory application is accordingly allowed. 7. The Registry is directed to register the connected criminal appeal and list Page No.# 3/3 the same for admission on a date to be fixed by it. 8. This interlocutory application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant