Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9940 (GAU)

KHIRESWAR SAIKIA @ BOGAI v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.

I.A.(Crl.)/476/2025 · 2025-08-07

Anjan Moni Kalita, Soumitra Saikia

Criminal Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010065972025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/476/2025 KHIRESWAR SAIKIA @ BOGAI S/O. SRI DURNA SAIKIA, R/O. VILL.- NO. 2 NABAJYOTI, P/O. AND P/S. MERAPANI, DIST. GOLAGHAT, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM. 2:GITANJALI BORA W/O. SRI SITARAM BORA R/O. NO. 2 NABAJYOTI P/S. MERAPANI DST. GOLAGHAT ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. N CHOUDHURY, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. M S MONDAL(R-2),MR. D A KAIYUM (R-2) Linked Case : ST.Rev./0/0 KHIRESWAR SAIKIA ALIAS BOGAI GOLAGHAT ASSAM VERSUS Page No.# 2/3 THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY PP ASSAM 2:SMT GITANJALI BORA GOLAGHAT ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : NIRMALA CHOUDHURY Advocate for : appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER 08.08 .2025 (S. SAIKIA, J) Heard Ms. N. Choudhury, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the applicant/appellant. Also heard Mr. M.S. Mondal, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2/respondent No.2 and Ms. A. Begum, learned APP for the opposite party No.1/respondent No.1. This Interlocutory Application filed by the applicant/appellant seeking condonation of delay of 142 days that had occurred in filing the accompanying criminal appeal against the judgment and order dated 03.09.2024 passed by the Special Judge (POCSO) at Golaghat in POCSO Case No. 54/2021. The learned counsel for the respondent does not object to the delay. Upon considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the grounds urged in support of the prayer for condonation of the delay and in absence of any specific objections from the respondents to the contrary Page No.# 3/3 and also considering the law laid down by the Apex Court in N. Balakrishnan Vs. M. Krishnamurthy reported in (1998) 7 SCC 123, this Court considers it appropriate to condone the delay, as prayed for. Accordingly, the delay of 142 days is condoned. The Interlocutory Application stands allowed and disposed. The Registry is directed to register the accompanying appeal and list it thereafter. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant