Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010173412026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/840/2026 BIJOY KALITA SON OF LATE RUPDHAR KALITA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- NO.1 JIYAKUR, UNDER CHHAYGAON POLICE STATION IN THE DISTRICT OF KAMRUP, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. U CHOUDHURY (LEGAL AID COUNSEL), Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER Date : 19.08.2026 Heard Mr. U. Choudhury, learned legal aid counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the opposite party. 2. This application, under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, is preferred by the Page No.# 2/3 applicant for condoning the delay of 347 days in preferring the connected criminal appeal, under Section 415(2) of the BNSS, 2023, against the judgment and order dated 02.07.2025, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kamrup, Amingaon, in Sessions Case No. 70/2023, by which the applicant was convicted under Sections 326/341 of the IPC, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- with default stipulation, under Section 326 of the IPC; and also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month for the offence under Section 341 of the IPC, and it was further directed that both the sentenced would run concurrently. 3. Mr. Choudhury, learned legal aid counsel for the applicant submits that he has been engaged in this matter on 13.07.2026 and earlier, another counsel was engaged by the Office of the Gauhati High Court Legal Services Authority, and the said counsel could not proceed with the matter and handed over the file. Mr. Choudhury also submits that subsequently, he has been given the task to represent the applicant and within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the file, he has prepared the connected appeal and this application. Mr. Choudhury further submits that the delay of 347 days occurred while the file was processed by the Gauhati High Court Legal Services Authority, and that the delay is not intentional, rather it is circumstantial, and that in the connected appeal, there is arguable points, and therefore, he has contended to condone the aforesaid delay and to hear and decide the appeal on merit. 4. Mr. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the opposite party submits that he has no objection in the event of condoning the delay of 347 days in filing the connected appeal. 5. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the application and the documents placed on Page No.# 3/3 record. 6. It appears that the delay has sufficiently been explained in paragraph Nos. 4, 5 and 6 of the application and accordingly, this Court is inclined to allow this application. 7. The delay of 347 days in filing the connected appeal stands condoned. 8. In view of the order passed today in this application, now the Registry shall proceed to register the connected appeal and thereafter, list the same before the Court as soon as practicable. 9. In terms of above, this I.A. stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant