Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010274782025 2026:GAU-AS:14291 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.L.P./55/2025 SRI SUSHANTA BANIK S/O LATE NARENDRA BANIK R/O RANGIRKHARI, WARD NO. 13, O PS- SILCHAR, CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN 788005 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. 2:SRI AMRITH KANTI NATH S/O HRIDAY NATH R/O HOUSE NO. 11 RAM MOHAN SARANI SONAI ROAD SILCHAR PO PS- SILCHAR CACHAR ASSAM PIN 78800 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S NATH, MS. R BHARALI,MS. K BHATTACHARYYA,DR G J SHARMA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Linked Case : I.A.(Crl.)/1344/2025 SRI SUSHANTA BANIK S/O LATE NARENDRA BANIK R/O RANGIRKHARI Page No.# 2/3 WARD NO. 13 O PS- SILCHAR CACHAR ASSAM PIN 788005 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ASSAM. 2:SRI AMRITH KANTI NATH S/O HRIDAY NATH R/O HOUSE NO. 11 RAM MOHAN SARANI SONAI ROAD SILCHAR PO PS- SILCHAR CACHAR ASSAM PIN 788006 ------------ Advocate for : MR S NATH Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 25.09.2026 1. Heard Mr. G.J. Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned APP appearing for the State of Assam. 2. It is further seen that the applicant has preferred the instant application seeking special leave under Section 419(4) of the BNSS to file a criminal appeal against the order passed by the revisional court affirming the order of the trial court whereby the complaint filed by the applicant was dismissed for default. 3. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that an appropriate criminal Page No.# 3/3 petition invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court ought to have been filed challenging the orders passed by the revisional court as well as the trial court. However, inadvertently, the applicant had filed the instant application seeking leave to prefer a criminall appeall before this Court. Accordingly, the learned counsel seeks permission to file an appropriate application challenging the said orders. He further submits that there may be some delay in filing such an application, however, the period spent in pursuing the remedy before the wrong forum ought not to be reckoned towards the delay in accordance with law. 4. In view of the submissions made, the applicant is at liberty to file an appropriate application in accordance with law. The question of limitation, if raised, shall be considered by the Court at the appropriate stage. 5. With the above observations, the instant petition stands closed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant