Page No.# 1/3 GAHC040005542026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : IA(Crl)/27/2026 Karsang Tania Son of Late Karsang Tadung, at Jully Jail, Itanagar, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh. VERSUS The State of AP and Anr represented by the PP of AP 2:Karsang Tamar Age: 0 Occupation : Son of Late Karsang Tadung Polo Colony PO and PS Naharlagun Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh Advocate for the Petitioner : Taring Takap, Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE ORDER Date : 23.04.2026 [M. Choudhury, J] Heard Mr. T. Tapak, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. T. Ete, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the opposite party no. 1, State of Arunachal Pradesh. Page No.# 2/3 2. The instant application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is preferred seeking condonation of the period of delay, which is stated to have occurred in preferring the accompanying criminal appeal. In the application, it is averred that the period of delay is 89 days, whereas the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the period of delay, which has occurred is, in fact, 54 days. Be that as it may. 3. The applicant as the appellant has preferred the accompanying criminal appeal under Section 415 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 against a Judgment and Order dated 13.11.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Yupia [‘the Trial Court’] in Sessions Case no. 64/2018. By the Judgment and Order dated 13.11.2025, the Trial Court has convicted the applicant-appellant for the offences under Section 302 and Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code [IPC]. For the offence of murder under Section 302, IPC, the applicant- appellant has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, with a default stipulation. 4. As the applicant-appellant has been convicted for the offence of murder and has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and the period of delay is not substantial, this Court after going through the grounds find that the applicant-appellant has been able to explain the period of delay showing sufficient cause. In view of the same, the period of delay is condoned. 5. For expeditious disposal of the accompanying appeal, the period of delay is required to be condoned and therefore, the notice to the informant is dispensed with at this stage as the informant will have the opportunity for appearance at the time of hearing of the accompanying appeal. 6. The Registry to register the accompanying criminal appeal and thereafter, list the same in the admission column, expeditiously. JUDGE JUDGE Page No.# 3/3 Comparing Assistant