Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010021752024 2026:GAU-AS:10939 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/94/2024 BUDHAN CHOUHAN S/O LT SANGUR CHOUHAN, VILL.- KABIRALI, P.S.- KALAIGAON, DIST.- UDALGURI, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP. BY P.P., ASSAM. 2:CHANDAN CHOUHAN S/O LT SETHARU CHOUHAN VILL.- KABIRALI P.S.- KALAIGAON DIST.- UDALGURI ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M AHMED, A. K. KANU Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, B K SINGHA (R-2),MR. N SHARMA (R-2) Linked Case : BUDHAN CHOUHAN VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR E ------------ Advocate for : MR M AHMED Advocate for : appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR E Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI O R D E R 06.08.2026. Heard Mr. M. Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicant/appellant. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. P.P., Assam, appearing for the State respondent as well as Mr. N. Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the accused/respondent No.2. This is an application Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, praying for condonation of delay of 70 days, in preferring the connected Criminal Appeal against the judgment and order dated 02.09.2023, passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Udalguri in Sessions (II) Case No.86/2022, whereby the accused/respondent No.2 was acquitted of the charges. The grounds of delay are stated in para 3 and 4 which read as follows: “3. That the Ld Addl. Session Judge passed judgment in on 02.09.23. Sessions (II) Case No. 86/2022 Thereafter the applicant applied for the certified copy of the Judgment dated 02.09.2023 along with certified copy of FIR, Charge sheet, Medical report, Deposition of the prosecution witnesses vide his application dated 11.09.23 In spite of repeated persuasion by the applicant the copy branch of the establishment of District and Sessions Judge, Udalguri, could not deliver the certified copies of the documents sought for. The said office could deliver the Judgment along with the other documents on 30.11.2023 and the same were received from the concern office on 30.11.23. 4. That there was no delay if the period of limitation is counted from the date of receiving the certified copies from the court below i.e on 30.11.23. If the period of limitation is counted from the date of receipt of the certified copies, the Judgment was pronounced on 02.09.2023 and the applicant applied for certified copies on 11.09.2023 which is received on 30.11.2023 and the appeal was preferred before this Hon'ble Court on 11.01.24. There was sufficient delay in furnishing the certified copies of the Judgment and other relevant documents. After receiving the certified copies the applicant came to Guwahati for discussing about his case and receiving the legal advice, it took some days for him to arrange the expenditure for filing his case. Moreover there was winter vacation from 21.12.2023 to 31.12.2023. Some days were taken for drafting of the connected appeal and connected leave petition. The period of limitation in preferring an Criminal Appeal before this Hon'ble Court is 60 days. In the present case the No. Page No.# 3/3 of days in September 2023 is 9 days, in December 2023 is 31 days and in January 2024 is 11 days and so the appeal was preferred on the 51st days if the limitation is counted from the date of receiving the certified copies. Actually there was no delay in preferring the appeal but after filling of the appeal, the filling section asks to file an application for delay of 70 days. As such the instant application under section 5 of the Limitation Act 1963 is filed as a precautionary measure.”. Mr. Ahmed, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that the delay of 70 days in preferring the connected appeal is not due to any negligence or lashes on the part of the applicant. On the other hand, Mr. Sharma, the learned counsel for the accused/respondent No.2 submits that the delay primarily occurred due to the applicant not taking proper steps in depositing the requisite Court Fee for obtaining the certified copy of the judgment and order. The State Counsel however submits that he has no instruction to oppose the prayer for condonation. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and having perused the ground urged in support of the condonation, it appears that the grounds are sufficient and bonafide. Accordingly the delay in filling the connected Criminal Appeal is condoned. The Registry is accordingly directed to register the appeal and list the same. This Interlocutory Application stands allowed and disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant